Purslane

Local groups determined to block wind projects have interfered with many developers’ plans for wind in Ontario.

By Mark Del Franco, North American Windpower, October 2009

Ontario-based developer AIM PowerGen proposed building four 9.9 MW wind projects in Harrow, Ontario, in 2007. But two years later, the company is still waiting for its building permit – a process that typically takes no more than six months to complete.

What’s the holdup? Local opponents have bird-dogged town officials to overly vet AIM PowerGen’s wind project, citing health concerns, according to Dave Timm, the developer’s vice president of strategic affairs.

On the surface, this is a minor issue, as wind developers frequently run into local snags. Granted, the concerns of some Harrow residents might be legitimate, but many industry watchers are concerned that a rash of health-related objections all around Ontario is more than a coincidence. Many say the so-called health concerns are actually a smoke screen for the real purpose: preventing wind projects.

Some developers have been shouted down at zoning meetings, while others now require police officers to keep order at town-hall functions. Still, other developers have had developments defaced. Such was the case at the Wolfe Island EcoPower Centre, where – as a show of protest – someone placed 86 cardboard hands (one for each turbine) firmly planted in the soil surrounding the turbines.

Then there’s the case of wind developer Glen Estill, president of Ontario-based Sky Generation, who owns two Ontario-based wind farms totaling 13.5 MW. For the last several months, a wind opponent has placed advertisements in Estill’s hometown newspaper derisively characterizing Estill as a “wind tycoon” with little regard for the community.

“In the last 18 months, the opposition in Ontario has really grown within a small but very vocal group,’) Timm says, adding that the local resistance steins from dedicated not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) advocacy groups hell-bent on blocking wind projects.

“There are people who drive several hours from town to town to disrupt meetings,” Estill says. “It’s fairly obvious because of the intensity and distances they travel.”

NIMBYs are easy to spot at meetings, according to Timm. In fact, he says, the same faces show up every time. “If you do this long enough, you’ll see the same faces at every meeting,’

Estill agrees. “These people aren’t NIMBYs – they’re BANANAs,” using the acronym for “build absolutely nothing anytime near anything.”

NIMBY past and present

NIMBYs, of course, are not new, although the level of commitment and creativity employed by the opposition is eye-opening.

“I have not seen anything like this before,” says Chris Forrest, vice president of communications and marketing at the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA). “Groups are coordinating fully orchestrated media campaigns with a ferocity and an intensity that has really taken us by surprise,” he says.

A decade ago, wind opponents used environmental concerns, specifically the preservation of bird and bats, as the basis of their complaints. Then, for a while, it was turbine safety. Each time, the wind industry relied on scientific research and analysis to prevail. Now, however, the focus has shifted to health impacts, which Timm admits are “a bit more difficult to defend.”

But 10 years ago, the Internet wasn’t as entwined with our daily lives as it now. Today, anyone with a Web browser can crank out information to the masses. Developers, such as Timm, say the information found on the Internet looks more like misinformation than a fact-based argument.

“The argument has moved from the science realm to the media realm,” he says. “And these guys are very astute at crafting a message.”

Some may view the challenges in Ontario as emblematic of a growing industry. It is only natural, as wind energy grew from alternative to mainstream, that there would be some growing pains along the way.

As early as 2003, the province had barely 100 wind turbines installed. Currently, there are 588 turbines in operation. By 2012, Ontario expects more than 975 turbines to be in operation – nearly 40% more than today.

Now overlay those numbers against the fact that Ontario is not only Canada’s most inhabited province, but it also has the highest percentage of college-educated residents.

And it only figures to get worse with the passage of the Green Energy and Green Economy Act of 2009, Ontario’s sweeping reform bill meant to encourage wind development in the province.

Green Energy Act

Among the act’s major provisions is a call for tightening the standards to block wind projects. No longer can wind opponents object to wind projects because of aesthetics – a popular tactic of the past. Now, opponents must tie their objections to health concerns.

This opposition has gotten the attention of the highest levels of the Dalton McGuinty government. In June, Premier McGuinty himself angered many by saying he wouldn’t tolerate NIMBY-ism at the expense of renewable energy development. “NIMBY-ism will no longer prevail,” he stated.

However, the government’s plan to hinder the opposition seems to have only energized opponents.

“We lost our right to argue through the Green Energy Act,” says John Laforet, president of Wind Concerns Ontario, an anti-wind group. “The government took away our right to debate, and it angered thousands of people,” he says, adding that he represents 34 grassroots organizations in 21 counties throughout Ontario.

Laforet, who claims no corporate sponsors or deep-pocketed backers does not advocate violence against the projects. He admits, however that public meetings, for example can get rowdy and raucous. “It happens when wind developers stand up at the meetings and tell lies.”

Kerry Adler, CEO of SkyPower Corp., one of the largest developers in Canada, is used to dealing with NIMBYs. In fact, he encounters them in nearly every project.

Adler says the majority of people will either agree with your project or still have their minds changed with a sound and reasoned approach. However, some will oppose your project no matter what. These people, according to Adler, are the “loud minority who will go to any extreme to oppose your project’ “

He adds that the silent majority need to become more vocal. “That’s a challenge we have. But if 50.1 percent of the people don’t oppose a wind project, it should be allowed to be built.”

Getting NIMBYs on your side

“It’s not a simple matter of providing better information about wind energy or getting political votes or reducing the regulatory hurdles NIMBYs can put in the way,” says Dave Hardy, president of consultancy Hardy Stevenson Associates. “The trick is turning the research into a pragmatic and workable action plan.

“Communities within which we are attempting to site wind projects aren’t singular entities,” he continues “Too often we view people at a meeting as having the same characteristics farmers or suburbanites or NIMBYs.

If we understand that they are members of families, places of work, faith groups – and if we structure our interactions with them in a way that recognizes what is influencing their decisions – we will have greater success in siting wind projects.”

Of course, not everyone who opposes a wind power project is a NIMBY. Some residents merely want clarity around the changing rules.

No matter how popular or well-intentioned a project, developers should always expect detractors. But those detractors might be managed more carefully.

For his part, Hardy says, “I get frustrated when the technical wind expert is thrust in front of a crowd for the first time, presents a 25-minute Power Point presentation and expects that no one will be opposed,” Hardy says. “Just because wind is environmentally sustainable doesn’t negate the fact that people may get upset.”

“We need to rely on the science. That’s how our industry combated concerns about birds and bats,” Timm recalls. “We should do the same with the NIMBY issue. There’s no evidence of a causal link between turbines and health impacts. Let’s bring the conversation back to science.”

Turning anti-wind sentiment into permits requires organization, strategy and plain ol’ grassroots politics.

By Ben Kelahan, North American Windpower, July 2009

Community relations may be the road to reputation, but understanding practical local politics paves the way to permits. Opposition groups are sophisticated, organized and well funded. They have borrowed the highest-priced tactics from corporate public relations and masterfully use the Web to circulate misinformation about the impacts of wind farms.

Understanding how the opposition plans to stop your wind farm may be the first step toward planning for its approval. The truth is that planned wind developments run into local trouble every day. Let’s begin by examining some customary tactics used by the opposition.

Opportunistic opposition

Energy developers, particularly wind developers, expect to face opposition from individual landowners and other residents based on the typical siting concerns, such as shadow flicker, noise impacts and property value arguments, that pop up across the country. However, in some cases the opposition takes on some special interest from known characters. Thus, it also takes special care in managing their impact.

Local politicians are accustomed to the usual suspects showing up at public hearings and in letters to the editor of weekly papers on controversial development projects.

Now, wind companies are beginning to notice a pattern to the cast of opponents appearing before zoning hearing boards, road commissioners and alderman, who oppose wind farms using the locality’s zoning codes and planning restrictions as tools to defeat developments town to town.

In Illinois alone, developers such as Horizon Wind Energy, NextEra Energy Resources and Iberdrola Renewables have been the targets of vociferous anti-wind sentiment.

Turning to the Web

Need talking points for the public hearing tonight? Look no further than the growing number of Web sites that circulate their own “myth versus fact” sheets about wind farms and their impact on local communities. Many of these sites have organized talking points by issue, including public safety concerns, such as wind turbine syndrome, or counter-arguments to wind energy’s effectiveness, such as like intermittency.

There are plenty of anti-wind Web sites online. These sites provide a quick primer should you be motivated to oppose the local wind farm proposed down the road. Further they provide best practices borrowed from wind energy site fights from around the globe, complete with per sonal testimonials of those that have opposed wind turbines and won.

The effectiveness of these online anti-wind sites is not necessarily their basis, because impactful opposition doesn’t necessarily need sound science or experience to be effective with local politicians. All it takes is an emotional trigger on a critical local issue to start the flames of opposition to motivate a vocal minority.

If the anti-wind sentiment goe unchecked by a majority of people in the project area who make known their support based on equally passionate arguments that activate locals to take political action on you behalf, you could be in trouble come the day of the permit vote.

Democracy in action

Wind developers are keen on establishing strong relationships within their communities. Community meetings are a popular method of introducing your project to the most people at one time.

An efficient and productive use of time and resources, community meetings provide an educational one-stop shop for answering questions and informing the public about your plans. Although these meetings can allay the concerns of locals, perceptions can change if you let the opposition speak at the gatherings.

So, that raises the question: Why have these meetings if they are not required? Some developers, mindful of being new to the community, do so as a courtesy. But is it helpful?

“It’s one thing if an agency requires a public session – you have to do those,” says Robert Kahn, a 25-year veteran public relations consultant working in wind power, “But it’s rarely a good idea to volunteer to host your own,” he says. “Too often, a public meeting simply provides opponents a chance to identify one another and get better organized. There are much better ways to get the word out.”

When the format for a community forum plays to the positions of opponents, beware.

Here’s how it typically occurs: In an effort to demonstrate transparency and a willingness to consider resident concerns about a wind development plan, the developer begins with a 10-minute presentation of the proposed plan, with specific sound bites reviewing the merits of constructing the wind farm in town. Some of the positives include green jobs, tax revenue, road improvements and donations to local schools. All of those benefits accruing to the community sound wonderful.

After your presentation, undecided residents are satisfied, even though they know it’s in your financial best interest to say so. So even after hearing the pitch, they may not trust you. Then, the outspoken opposition speaks about public safety and health issues. For those attending the hearing, it is a question of taking sides.

If you are fortunate, the undecided members will leave undecided. However, those who have decided may be recruited to speak against you at the next hearing on your special-use permit.

At some point in the approval process, holding an open house allows local residents to see visual simulations, maps and descriptions of construction plans and schedules, along with displays of planned environmental mitigations. An open house is far more relaxed than a community meeting.

Thinking like your opponents may mean acting like them. Several wind power developers have encouraged local citizens to organize support groups around which to rally environmental and property rights activists, business interests and other pro-wind constituencies. Think of these groups as an anti-not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) antidote.

“There’s no substitute for supporters standing up and speaking out on behalf of proposed projects,” Kahn says. “They can say things which a developer, who has one hand tied behind his back, can’t.’

What you can do

However, until such counter-NIMBY organizations expand, developers must n-lake a concerted effort to outnumber the vocal minority and special interest groups that desire a political victory for their own constituencies and members. It can be done, starting with the following basic steps:

Research. Understand the political climate surrounding your project before you go public with your proposal. First, make a list of likely supporters and opponents. Then, do some research. Has this site been the subject of previous controversies? Some sites are considered too troublesome and will never succeed in obtaining change-of-use permits. Knowing the history of the site could impact your decision making.

Time and target your outreach. Never let the news media be the first to describe the impact of your wind project nor be considered the best source of facts about your plans for the site. Inform the politicians and neighbors before they read it in the press.

Persuade. Go door to door informing landowners and residents. Explain the proposal, and attempt to determine who will support it, who will stay neutral and who will oppose. Shortcuts, such as hosting public meetings, will not do the trick in inoculating public opinion over a wind power project.

Get started by scheduling small meetings with key constituencies and community leaders. “These are the people who shape local opinion,” says Kahn. “Their support will be indispensable in countering the opposition.”

Political process. You need to attack this as if you were a local politician running for office, which means identifying, recruiting and organizing. Organize supporters, and then get them to attend meetings, sign petitions and write letters to the editor. Above all, you need to demonstrate public support equal to or greater than that of your opponents.

Negotiate when possible. In some cases, you can offer mitigation, or negotiate in some other way to get opponents to drop their positions. In other cases, the opponents or their backers have an economic interest in defeating your project that will never be overcome by an attempt at compromise.

In those cases, you must marshal sufficient political support to overcome the opposition and be prepared to educate your supporters in the community about what you know about your opposition – where they come from and why you feel they’re involved. Let them be the judge.

Ben Kelahan is senior vice president, energy, at Vienna, Va.-based Saint Consulting Group, a community outreach consultancy. He can be reached at (703) 531-8274 or kelahan@tscg.biz.

The Westmill facility, near Watchfield, South Oxfordshire, England, consists of five Siemens Bonus 1.3-MW machines, each with a rotor diameter of 62 m (203.5 ft) and a total height of 80 m (262.5 ft).

from James Kent Associates …

The Discovery Process

Discover the “Inside Point of View”

The key to implementing successful change is to understand the social and cultural structure within a community of place. The “inside point of view” becomes clear by entering everyday routines, making observations, and engaging in conversation with community members. This is called “The Discovery Process”. Since 1967 our company has worked with communities, corporations, and governments to implement “The Discovery Process”.

Gathering Places

At the heart of every community are gathering places where people naturally congregate to talk about current events. These places provide a structure for local network systems to thrive.

Informal Networking

The objective of the Discovery Process is to get a real-time understanding of what is happening.

• What are the current activities?
• What are the social and economic trends?
• What are the social networks by which people organize themselves?
• Who are the well regarded caretakers, communicators, and storytellers?

Creating Citizen Ownership

By entering a community through this network process we come to understand the core issues that are of concern to the people. Issues affect proposed projects, management decisions, and policy formation. By identifying these issues we can take appropriate actions early in the process that optimizes resource efficiency. This creates an environment amenable to preventing and resolving conflicts in a culturally sensitive manner.

Fostering Mutual Benefit

Issues that have been identified in their emerging stage can be integrated with management concerns to create “cultural alignment” in which mutual benefit for all parties is possible. Without this grounding in the informal system of community, projects can get bogged down or ambushed, often at the last minute, or held hostage by extreme interests. Even if the project is approved, the results are often disastrous to the local culture of the community. We take these factors into account early in the process and create an environment amenable to preventing and resolving conflicts in a culturally sensitive way.

Issue Management

Issue Management is a method of minimizing surprise and disruption by creating a predictable, natural process of communication and action. It is a process of identifying issues in a community and organization and responding to them in a way that addresses the health and integrity of both the community and the proponent of change.

Issue Resolution Affects Project Outcome

Every project produces change that generates citizen issues which affect project outcome. Issues are subjects of widespread public interest and discussion that an individual, network or group has decided to act upon to protect and maintain control of their environment.

We have learned over the years that citizen issues have stages of development – emerging, existing, and disruptive. As issues progress through the various stages, their effects on individuals, communities, and organizations intensify.

The Life Cycle of an Issue

Emerging Issues are a curiosity phase. They are born when people become uncertain about the effect of proposed changes on their ability to protect and control their environment.

Existing Issues – If management does not “hear” the emerging issue, or if the decision is made to procrastinate, delay or ignore the response, an emerging issue will escalate into an Existing Issue. Existing Issues are a demand phase and are still resolvable through facilitation.

Disruptive Issues generate such ill will that local methods to solve them are not effective. They are handled by another level of society, usually the courts or legislatures.

As issues progress through the various stages, their effects on individuals, communities and organizations intensify.

People Own Issues

Some issues are identified through formal systems of communication such as public forums. We also tap into the informal system of communication to uncover issues at the grassroots level. In responding to these issues we create a moderate middle ground where citizen involvement becomes part of the issue-solving process. Through this process we diminish the wind in the sails of the extreme voices.

It is imperative to identify the owners of issues and maintain their identity throughout the issue management process. Only when the owners of the issues are known can the process stay grounded and the issue effectively responded to.

Themes and Issues

Issue Management distinguishes between themes and issues. Issues are actionable and grounded in resolutions. Themes are wide-spread perceptions or attitudes that are too general or abstract to act upon.

An example of a theme: “I am against growth”. With further investigation, the real issue underlying the theme is uncovered: “I am against growth because the parks are over-crowded and my kids have no place to play”.

If the public discourse gets captured by themes, sound bites begin to dominate and the value of action gets lost – the project will spin its wheels without traction or forward movement. Controversy is a by-product of themes and low morale and depleted energy is a by-product of controversy. The best way to create positive change in a controversial setting is to focus on emerging ISSUES and watch the themes disappear.

Resolve Emerging Issues to Avoid Disruption

Issues identified in the “emerging” stage, discovered through the informal system of communication, can be resolved at the local level with the least amount of time and resources.

Unresolved emerging issues become “existing” issues. Because these issues were not identified and resolved at the emerging, local level, they are often appropriated by formal bodies, such as environmental or industry groups, which use them to bolster support for a political, economic or ideological agenda.

“Disruptive” issues are beyond the control of local systems to resolve and are aggregated to higher levels of authority, such as legislatures or the courts.

Case Study

Windfarms Limited in 1980 sought approval, through the federal impact statement process and County and State permitting, for the construction of twenty wind turbines near Kahuku Point, on the northeast coast of Oahu, Hawaii. At a project cost of $350 million, it involved the proponent, the general contractor, the local public utility company, the turbine assembly company, the large landowner and the public.

The development situation on Oahu in recent years had been characterized as chaotic and uncertain. Projects had been receiving greater scrutiny than ever before and controversy seemed to be the norm for any project review. Into this context, the proponent brought an attitude that design from a technical point of view only and public contact through the formal review process would be sufficient. Moreover, the proponent felt that since wind is a clean energy source, it would be acceptable to everyone.

These attitudes were not sensitive to local conditions. The local communities of Kahuku, Laie, Hauula, Kahana, Punaluu, and Kaawa, which would be affected by the decision, were highly diverse in background and interests. In addition, past projects in the area had created unresolved negative issues that were being carried informally and with hostility in the communities.

Early on, the proponents, unarmed with an issue-driven assessment process, were caught off guard by demands from the people concerning impacts that they, the Windfarm’s developers, didn’t create. The people had carried their negative experience with another developer into this experience with the “new kid on the block.” The developers were faced with the crisis of how to deal with “issue loading.”

By shifting to an issue-driven assessment process that included a commitment to work with the informal community networks in resolving issues as they emerged, management was able to separate their project from past projects and, therefore, focus on their impacts. For instance, a planned early announcement of the impending impact assessment (project start-up) would have angered traditional informal community leaders, and the announcement was postponed until these contacts were made. This was a critical strategic decision since a negative start would have been difficult to overcome given the emotions of the people.

It was important to gain control of issue management at the local level since outsiders often try to push their hostility for a project into local networks. For instance, some island environmentalists told local residents that low hums and vibrations of the wind machines would be intrusive health-wise and would foul up their TVs. Good information about this issue in the local network setting defused the issue. The proposed flashing aircraft warning lights on the wind towers caused consternation in the community-”Our mountains look like Christmas trees already!” This was resolved by shielding the lights from ground view.

One early controversy was created by the use of out-of-area high school students to fly meteorological kites. Kite flying is a traditional and highly-honored sport among Hawaiians, who were outraged when their expertise was bypassed.

Finally and most seriously, the plans of the proponent to transport assembled towers by highway would not have been acceptable to the communities, and they wisely worked out a barging-by-water solution.

Other issues and impacts were addressed through mitigation agreements contained in the permit. These included:

• the hiring of local labor who agreed, as a condition of the assessment process, to join the union;
• an agreement that local residents would operate and maintain the visitor’s center; and
• an agreement, in principle, to support secondary business development and the transfer of lease lands to fee simple.

Kahuku Wind Farms was the first development approved in eight years on Oahu with full citizen support.

Indicators of Issue Intensity

Emerging Issues
Explicit Feelings
Numerous Options
Phone Calls
Letters
No Response
Local Involvement
Informal Discussions
Grassroots Awareness
Legitimate Questions
Uncertainty, Doubt
Increased Anxiety
Project Threat

Existing Issues
Intensified Feelings
Outside Involvement
Leadership Involvement
Media Coverage
Personal Time Loss
Rumors
Increased Project Costs
Hardening of Positions
Options Narrowed
Demands
Exaggeration
Ownership of Issues
Polarization of Issues
Coalition Building
Appeals to Higher Authority
Legal Involvement
Stalled Projects

Disruptive Issues
Feelings of Failure
Feelings of Crises
Emergence of Hardliners
Polarization of People
Loss of Cooperation
Loss of Creativity
Involvement of High-Level Managers
Coalitions Formed
Outside Intervention
Legal Intervention
Litigation
Legislation
Loss of Options
Stalemate
Legal Costs
Loss of Power
Media Campaigns
Civil Disobedience
Reallocation of Resources
Loss of Credibility
Imposed Sanctions
Project Postponed or Canceled

Thu, 12 Feb 2009

Dear ——,

Please see the below emails detailing my concerns as a landowner in the midst of the Altona Windpark. I have not gotten a single response to this (2nd) email (18 days ago). The first email elicited a phone call from Lisa in which she said she was looking into getting awnings for me; Dan and Brett were looking at the TV issue; they wouldn’t do any sound tests until all were up and running. I haven’t heard any more regarding ANYTHING!

The visual effects of the windpark are very disorienting. I can see turbines from all but one window. They give me a feeling of motion sickness and dizziness. The sound on a breezy day like today is maddening. I have been told that I am in a unique position in which the sound reverberates/echos/concentrates on/to my home. I am constantly expecting to see an airplane overhead. At night the flashing lights have four or five tempos/patterns between all that I can see and that are currently running — not in sync.

I am appealing for any help that you can give to me.

Thanking you in advance for your time and consideration.

Regards,
~~~~~~

=========================
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009
To: Lisa Vigneault
Cc: Dan Nugent; Brett Hastings
Subject: concerns

Lisa,

I know we discussed all of this but the only issue I have addressed in writing was the television reception. I am not sure what can be done to rectify any of this, but I need to voice my frustration, concern, disappointment and anger and hope for some relief.

1) TV reception has been adversely affected, especially on channel 5, WPTZ. One night last week, the interference was “keeping time” to the turning of the turbine.

2) I can hear the “whoosh, whoosh, whoosh” of the turbines from within my house. It is not anything like the steady hum of a refrigerator … there is NO comparison.

3) The simultaneously flashing red lights are horrendous. They are not in sync with the SFRL on either the microwave tower or the met tower, both of which are completely visible to me. They leave “trails” when you look away as well. The park is not all “up and running” yet either, so I am sure it is not going to get any better.

4) There are turbines out every window except one at my house. When I wake in the morning, they are centered out each of my bedroom windows (one of which will be blinking). When I slept in last week and woke, from my bed, I could see the shadow of the blades turning on the tower sections of turbine 60. Two weeks ago, when I was washing my truck at ten a.m. the shadow of the blades was falling on the tree line between me and Montreal. (Nice view no more.) Sit on my couch and they are in both front windows, the front door, the rear window and the screen room window. Get a cup of coffee or go to the pantry and you are confronted with approximately 15. Stand or sit on the front porch, 21. I invite anyone to spend a day at my home, into the evening when they are lit. At the right time of day the sun is behind the ones on the kitchen/pantry side and I get the added bonus of flicker.

5) All along I have been told how “worth it” this was going to be, how unobtrusive they would be, how they wouldn’t really affect me much. Now I am being asked didn’t I know this was going to happen? Wasn’t I shown maps? Why didn’t I speak up sooner? By the time I ever heard anything about Noble coming to town, Ron Hoy, Cory Lucia and Terry Boyea had already been signed up. What could I have done? I did not sign anything until Terry was going to lose a turbine. Prior to that, I refused all agreements with Noble.

While this may not seem like much of anything to anyone, I am the girl who lived in the middle of the corn fields for ten years; the girl who lives outside from the break of spring ’til the fall of fall and any nice day thereafter. I put in a beautiful “bird sanctuary”, an expensive garden, etc, etc. I am the girl who weeds the driveway to continue having something to do outside. The wind park has completely ruined the quality of my life in this home that I love.

Thanks for listening and I await response/reaction.

Sincerely,
~~~~~~

=========================
To: NugentD@NOBLEPOWER.COM; BoydD@NOBLEPOWER.COM
CC: HastingsB@NOBLEPOWER.COM; VigneaultL@NOBLEPOWER.COM
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009

Dan Boyd, I apologize for not addressing this to you as well originally. I will forward my previous email to you.

You all need to come here and experience this. Dots and elevation lines on a piece of paper mean NOTHING. I have just stood in my kitchen recording the flicker. (8:15 a.m., January 24, 2009) My head and body are trembling, dizzy, vibrating; the right way to describe what is happening to me right now eludes me. I do know that it is very uncomfortable. This feeling is from standing in my kitchen and subjecting myself to the flicker for about six minutes in order to document what has happened to my home. This is unbearable. I can not even imagine what I am going to do this summer if I am not able to buy another home. Live here, board up the windows, mow at night, let the garden go to weeds, and wash the truck in Plattsburgh? This is completely unacceptable. I have lived here for ten years, enjoying the serenity, the view, the peacefulness. It is now like an airport runway (lights), an airplane hovering overhead steadily, or an under-maintained amusement park ride (sounds), and a discotheque (flicker). I am emotionally and physically sick and distraught over this. I am not in a very good position to purchase another home as my job is done on Friday. I know getting a loan is going to be difficult until I have again been employed for a year. Selling the house is not going to be the easiest in this economic climate, not to mention the buyer needs to be oblivious to what the turbines have done to this piece of God’s Country. I have more than tripled the value of this home in ten years. What has this wind park done to it? In my eyes, it has erased ten years of blood, sweat, tears and considerable money and hard work.

Lisa, you made a comment to me about not biting the hand that feeds me. I have worked for Noble for 2-1/2 years. Yes, I have drawn a paycheck; I am also eligible for HEAP (heating assistance). I truly think that being an employee and being a landowner should be totally separate issues. I had planned to live here for the rest of my life. I don’t see that as possible now. I just put in a new wood furnace, Bilco doors, and a new well, NOT because I planned to move in the next year! I don’t think it fair of anyone to think I should shut up and accept what happened here just because I was an employee for a relatively short time or because somewhere in thousands of pages the town was warned. Awnings will not solve the problem. Curtains will not cure the problem. Yes, I could maybe stand in the kitchen and get my coffee, but what about as soon as the weather breaks and I have my coffee on the porch and come back in at bedtime??? Trees would help a lot, but they need years to grow. What about the sound? We all know it is going to change with the season. Come now when they aren’t all running and get a clue about what I’m talking about. TV reception? I have already purchased my digital converter boxes. They didn’t help. What are we waiting for on that? I am at my wits end. I need solid answers from you, not Lisa calling and quoting what is in the town laws, studies from other areas, statements in the DEIS and FEIS, etc. I am a real person with a REAL problem. I am asking very seriously for solutions, not rhetoric and quotes. Again, I invite any and all to come experience this first hand. Come with the attitude of a girl who has worked harder than hell to come full circle from a bad marriage complete with debt, bad credit and nothing but a mobile home and a junk car. I really don’t care, but come see and hear what I do. I’m quite sure that no one could HONESTLY say there is nothing wrong with what happened here. I was recently introduced as “the girl who lives in the industrial park”. Nice.

I suggested to Tim McNeil that Noble Operations buy the house. It would be a perfect site for an Ops building for the Altona park. Tim remarked that it is in the middle of nowhere, why would they want it. Well, maybe because it is in the MIDDLE of the damn park.

I have been warned not to send this email as it may impact the offer of a contract to return as a consultant or to be rehired in the future. I find that disturbing, but if it is true, so be it. I have been a good, loyal employee and have earned my keep. This is my future.

Sincerely,
~~~~~~

This video accompanies a report, The Politics of Peat, published by the Scottish Wind Assessment Project. It makes available news reports by Jim Fahy of Radio Telefis Éireann covering the Derrybrien bog slide of 16 October 2003 and subsequent events. Note that the first 2.5 minutes are silent.

The incident, caused by the developer and contractor of a 71-turbine wind-power project, led to the widespread pollution of important European conservation areas and the death of 50,000 fish, including protected species.

The material on this video is © 2003 Radio Telefis Éireann and licenced for limited distribution. No reproduction is allowed without the permission of RTÉ or, where appropriate, SWAP.  Under “fair use”/”fair dealing” provision of copyright law, it is provided here at small size as an educational resource for individuals seeking it. Running time: approx. 16 minutes.

Excerpts from Wind Project Community Organizing by Timlynn Babitsky (2008)

Phase One — Choose an issue, map an agenda

In choosing an issue on which to focus resources, the most common mistakes are:

• Taking on too many issues at one time
• Choosing too complex an issue
• Choosing the wrong issue for the resources available
• Ignoring other groups working on the same issue
• Ignoring the larger picture
• Failing to prioritize
• Failing to agree on which issue to pursue
• Confusing passion for the need to plan

Step 1: Identify greatest interest and potential for success

Step 2: Select one key inspiring issue

Step 3: Research issue for the big picture

• Research questions to inspire good homework include:
• What is the history of this issue and the underlying issues that led to it?
• How much of the conflict around this issue can be attributed to misinformation?
• What are the underlying goals and interests of those who support or oppose this issue?
• What policies support or constrain this issue?
• Whose interests are being met if nothing changes [or if it does]?
• Is there conflict around this issue? Is it latent, developing, or fully escalated?
• Is the conflict ripe for resolution or is it in the best interest of those involved to continue with [or protect] the status quo?

Step 4: Map issue space to identify agenda

To Map an Issue:

• Define the issue precisely.
• List all the elements directly involved in this issue
• List other elements that are related to this issue, but not directly
• List other issues that are peripherally related
• Identify positive and negative elements and peripheral issues

Phase Two — Identify network resources, determine support

Step 5: Map the issue network

Every issue has at least one opinion leader. Every agenda affects at least one stakeholder. Every organization — hierarchical or flat — has at least one information/access gatekeeper.

The opinion leader holds information and expresses it, gaining some measure of power and respect. The stakeholder stands to gain or lose something in an agenda. The gatekeeper allows access, or not, to special information, people, or places. … Gatekeepers are often quite powerful although their public role may make them seem only marginal.

Map the issue network of opinion leaders, stakeholders, and gatekeepers.

• Identify the key people surrounding the issue
• Draw connections that exist between members of this issue network
• Identify supporters and resisters in this network
• Highlight key people to consider approaching to move the agenda forward

Step 6: Map social networks

[O]ne’s network of direct connections and connections of two degrees of separation ["friend of a friend"] are critical to successful advocacy.

Map social networks of personal connections:

• Draw maps of the direct connections in the social networks of the activists working on this agenda
• Identify those direct connections who may be potential allies
• Identify any second-degree connections who may support this agenda

Step 7: Approach each person as an ally

Approaching each person as if he/she were an ally is the most important skill an activist can develop.

Assess recent approaches to members of the Issue Social Network:

• Use the map developed in step 5
• Identify those expected to resist (R), support (S), or oppose (O) your agenda
• Identify the approach used in most recent interactions as positive (+), negative (−), or neutral (/)

Step 8: Select potential allies for agenda

To select the potential allies for an agenda, consider the following questions:

• What resource does he/she control? How dependent is the agenda on that resource?
• Des a relationship with that person already exist or must a new one be built?
• How much time, effort or other resources will likely be required to ain cooperation?
• Are there alternative others?
• If this person is likely a barrier, is there a direct connection that can help to influence him/her?
• Can he/she be reached at two degrees of separation?

Keep in mind that others in the issue network, who may not be potential allies, are important to your advocacy agenda:

• Who should be kept informed of progress?
• Who should be avoided entirely?

Step 9: Discover currencies of each ally

In Influence Without Authority [Allan Cohen and David Bradford, 2005], currencies are grouped into five categories:

• Inspiration-related currencies include having a chance to do important things and having the opportunity to do what is “right” by a higher standard
• Task-related currencies include providing resources, assistance, support, and information related to the ally’s own agendas
• Position-related currencies include recognition, visibility, reputation, importance, and access to contacts
• Relationship-related currencies include understanding, closeness, friendship, emotional support, personal backing, acceptance, and inclusion
• Personal-related currencies include appreciation, indebtedness, ownership of and influence over important tasks, self-esteem, self-identity, and comfort

A win-win exchange depends on offering something of value that will engage a potential ally’s interest and support. The key to a successful exchange will depend on figuring out which currency the potential ally prefers or needs.

To understand the currencies of a potential ally, try these strategies and questions:

• Be a good listener during conversations; take notes
• Pay attention as others discuss your potential ally; take notes
• On what agendas is he/she working? What can you do to help advance their work?
• What are their interests? What do you have in common?
• What do they value? About what do they care passionately?
• Who is important to them? Do you have any relationships in common?

Step 10: Identify advantages and assets

[A]dvantages and assets are currencies that the advocacy group has to offer potential allies in exchange for cooperation and support.

• Brainstorm to develop a list of the organization assets
• Have each advocate in the group develop a list of their personal advantages and assets
• Determine which assets can be helpful in any way to advance the group agenda

Phase Three — Propose an agenda

Step 11: Present a win-win agenda

The most common strategy is to show an ally how cooperating with a request or supporting an agenda will help him/her to achieve their own desired goals or agendas. …

If goals are too dissimilar, the next most common strategy is to offer an ally something valuable to him/her in return for whatever is needed for the agenda. The five categories of currencies identified in step 9 will be helpful.

Other potential strategies include:

• Offering to compensate ally for potential costs incurred
• Identifying costs to the advocate if the ally does not support the agenda
• Calling in past debts

Step 12: Frame the message to generate interest

No matter how complex an agenda may be, it is important to be able to describe it clearly and succinctly. The “30-second elevator pitch” is something you should practice and perfect. It is the basic introduction of who you are and what you are looking for. It will form the basis of your introductory message when networking and when first approaching a potential ally to begin a win-win exchange.

Phase Four — Expand the network

Step 13: Use all media channels to promote the agenda

Use every possible source available to tell the wind energy story. Use every wind story you come across to contact the media to get it covered. Take photos and write up a briefing and pass it along to your news media contacts. Local stories … are regional or state-level stories if you make that connection.

Step 14: Helping others expands your resources

Each ally you develop has a social network of relationships. As you strengthen a relationship with one individual, you are building potential connections to a whole set of new potential allies. Helping others is so often the best way to help yourself.

Step 15: Hard work builds credibility and incremental success

Do not wait for The Big Win before opening that bottle of sparkling water [sic]. Celebrate little successes, and keep allies informed. …Spread the word to the opinion leaders, stakeholders, and gatekeepers identified in step 5.

Step 16: Develop plan A, and alternative plans

Step 17: Learn from others

For advocates who are trying to promote the adoption of wind power, there are many challenges: government regulations; transmission access policies; zoning, siting, and licensing restrictions; environmental, avian, noise, and aesthetic opposition; competitor politics; high costs; resistant funding sources; near-neighbor conflict; and radiofrequency interference. This is just the short list. …

Keep in touch with others who are working on similar agendas. Share information, ideas, and resources. Do not be afraid to ask for advice.

“Denise Como is running for a seat on the Stark [N.Y.] Town Board. Her barn was burned to the ground last night. It was an empty horsebarn. No animals in it, no equipment.

“We arrived home from campaigning at about 9:30. Denise put her campaign signs out at about 10:30 last night. The dogs set up an alarm near midnight. She heard a truck in the driveway, but trucks often turn around in her driveway and she didn’t think anything of it. A few minutes later, all the dogs set up an alarm and wouldn’t quit. She looked out the door, and the barn was engulfed in flames. The firemen arrived promptly, but it was already lost. Somewhat later, they realized her campaign signs were gone. Presumably, they were either thrown in the fire or taken away. The metal standards may be found in the smoldering ashes, but the fire was very hot, and they may not be found. The fire is being treated as arson, and the state police are investigating.

“I have ten registered Morgan horses in my barn. The message is clear.

“My daughter wants me to withdraw from the election. I don’t think that will happen. I will probably start sleeping at the barn until after the election. Hmmm. Wonder how I’m going to keep this from Grandma!”

By Garret Keizer
[Notebook, Harper's Magazine, June 2007, p. 9-11]

Global warming, we are told, will have its most devastating effects on the world’s disadvantaged. Therefore, we need not care so particularly about the world’s disadvantaged; we need care only about global warming — as mediated, of course, by those who stand to make a bundle off it. … To quote Mr. Gore, global climate change is “not a political issue; it’s a moral issue,” glad tidings of great joy to souls weary of such crassly political issues as universal health care, reproductive freedom, the rights of workers, the treatment of captives, the plight of women and men shoveled daily off our sidewalks like so much offal …

Am I too irreverent? Am I not aware that polar bears are drowning in the Arctic? I am very much aware and very grieved as well. I am also aware, thanks to book after book by Jonathan Kozol, that children are drowning in our inner-city schools and have been drowning there year after year and decade after decade, but I do not recall anything like the universal lament that has met the drowning scene in An Inconvenient Truth. Then again, the polar bear depicted in that movie has two incontrovertible advantages over Kozol’s kids: it’s digital and it’s white. …

A new chorus of sanctimonious ministers will point to the melting ice caps, much as Bush and Cheney pointed to the site of the twin towers, and dare any would-be dissenter to profane the rising steam. I give them six months to find the temerity to say, “You are either with us or you are against us.”

… Gore speaks of the need for “a different perspective,” one that will place us “above ourselves and above history” …. But this is the old perspective: the race to the moon, the triumph of the will, the forward march of progress on a goosestep and a prayer. The unquestioned belief that the answer to every human dilemma and desire is a gizmo — in short, the very attitude that gave us global warming to begin with. Those measuring the ice shelf in Greenland would do well to spend a few weeks measuring the time that typically elapses between any mention of conservation and the quick segue to something sexier; that is, to something you can buy or sell. The abolition of obscene excess, the equitable distribution of finite resources — these have the same appeal for our movers and shakers as adopting a crack baby has for the infertile members of their club. …

If I sound bitter it is partly because I have been vouchsafed a glimpse of the new carbon-trading world order in the New England villages where I have lived, taught, and buried the dead for close to thirty years, and where any egress from one’s house now risks collision with an eco-fluent carpetbagger. Apparently, this place that has never had much use to the larger world beyond that of hosting a new prison or a solid-waste dump turns out to be an ideal location for an industrial “wind farm,” ideal mostly because the people are too few and too poor to offer much in the way of resistance. So far only one of the towns affected has “volunteered” — in much the same way and for most of the same reasons as our children volunteer for service in Iraq — to be the site of what might be described as a vast environmentalist grotto of 400-foot-high spinning “crosses” before which the state’s green progressives will be able to genuflect and receive absolution before zooming back to their prodigiously wired lives.

… The intestinal tipping point came for me when a contingent of students from Middlebury College (annual tuition and fees $44,330) found both the gas money and the gall to drive to the town of Sheffield (annual per capita income $13,277) in order to lecture the provincials on their responsibility to the earth and its myriad creatures. …

And the offset mongers and their green-team lackeys, those whose favorite sneering put-down is “not in my back yard,” will be glad to know that none of this — the wind farm, the coal plant it “offsets,” or any wasted life that perishes in between — is even close to their back yards. …

It is not enough to acknowledge that global warming exists; we also need to ask what global warming means. Surely one thing it means is that a culture that has as its highest aim the avoidance of anything remotely resembling physical work must change its life. If you want an inconvenient truth, there it is: that the very notion of convenience upon which our civilization rests is a lie that is killing us. …

The game of finding someone else to fight our wars, pull our rickshaws, and serve as the offset for our every filthy indulgence is just about up. It is either Earth for all of us or hell for most of us. Those are the terms, those have always been the terms, and any approach to climate change that begins on those terms can count me as a loyal partisan.

complete article (scan):