Letters of Support for Great Bay Wind

Economic Benefit

Property Values



Birds and Bats

Life Cycle



Wind Energy Information

Economic Benefit

Economic Impact of Wind Generation Project in Somerset County Kenneth R Stanton, Ph. D., University of Baltimore, Jacob France Institute

The Jacob France Institute(JFI) at the University of Baltimore published an in depth economic impact analysis of Great Bay Wind Energy Center’s effects on employment, labor income, output, and the fiscal impact at the County and State level. The study projects during construction Great Bay Wind will generate 529 jobs within the Somerset, and 766 jobs across. This amounts to $66.8 million and $99.5 million of additional economic activity in the County and State respectively.

The tax revenues from the project pose another significant benefit to Somerset County – a County that continues to be ranked among the poorest in the state. Once the project is operational, JFI projects The Great Bay Wind Energy Center will generate $3.4 million additional taxes each year, $2.9 million within Somerset County. In terms of the current County budget, the $2.3 million addition in property taxes alone represents over 10% of the Real Estate and Income Tax revenues in the current budget.

Letter from Daniel K. Thompson, Economic Development Director, Somerset County Economic Development Commission

A letter from the Somerset County Economic Development Commission, signed by Daniel Thompson, outlines the commission’s support for the introduction of wind turbines to Somerset County and the tremendous economic benefits it holds for the community.

Wind Power Opens Door to Diverse Opportunities” U.S. Department of Energy. April 2010

This fact sheet is published by the U.S. Department of Energy outlining the job creation potential of wind energy across the United States.

Online Wind-Related Manufacturing Facilities” AWEA U.S. Wind Industry Annual Market Report year ending 2011

Fact sheet displaying the 470 operating manufacturing facilities making wind related products in 42 states across the United States.

Property Values

The Impact of Wind Power Projects on Residential Property Values in the United States: A Multi-Site Hedonic Analysis,” Hoen et al (2009), Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy, this work investigates the concern that property values will be adversely affect by wind energy facilities. The conclusions of the study are drawn from eight different hedonic pricing models, as well as both repeat sales and sales volume models. The various analyses are strongly consistent in that none of the models uncover conclusive evidence of the existence of any widespread property value impacts that might be present in communities surrounding wind energy facilities. Specifically, neither the view of the wind facilities nor the distance of the home to those facilities is found to have any consistent, measurable, and statistically significant effect on home sales prices.

A Spatial Hedonic Analysis of the Effects of Wind Energy Facilities on Surrounding Property Values in the United States,” Hoen et al (2013), Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Prepared by the Ernesto Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, this study finds that there is no evidence that “home prices near wind turbines were affected either in post-construction or post announcement/pre construction periods.” The study has a robust sample size, using data from more than 50,000 home sales in 17 different states. All of the homes were within ten miles of a wind turbine.

Relationship between Wind Turbines and Residential Property Values in Massachusetts” Carol Atkinson-Palombo, Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, University of Connecticut;  Ben Hoen, Staff Research Associate, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

“This study investigates a common concern of people who live near planned or operating wind developments: How might a home’s value be affected by the turbines? Previous studies on this topic, which have largely coalesced around non-significant findings, focused on rural settings. Wind facilities in urban locations could produce markedly different results. Nuisances from turbine noise and shadow flicker might be especially relevant in urban settings, where negative features, such as landfills or high voltage utility lines, have been shown to reduce home prices. To determine if wind turbines have a negative impact on property values in urban settings, this report analyzed more than 122,000 home sales, between 1998 and 2012, that occurred near the current or future location of 41 turbines in densely populated Massachusetts communities.

The term “urban” in this document includes both urban and suburban areas. The results of this study do not support the claim that wind turbines affect nearby home prices. Although the study found the effects from a variety of negative features (such as electricity transmission lines and major roads) and positive features (such as open space and beaches) generally accorded with previous studies, the study found no net effects due to the arrival of turbines in the sample’s communities. Weak evidence suggests that the announcement of the wind facilities had a modest adverse impact on home prices, but those effects were no longer apparent after turbine construction and eventual operation commenced. The analysis also showed no unique impact on the rate of home sales near wind turbines. These conclusions were the result of a variety of model and sample specifications detailed later in this report.”


Wind Turbine Health Impact Study: Report of Independent Expert Panel,” Ellenbogen et al (2012), Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Massachusetts Department of Public Health

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) in collaboration with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) convened a panel of independent experts to identify any documented or potential health impacts of risks that may be associated with exposure to wind turbines, and, specifically, to facilitate discussion of wind turbines and public health based on scientific findings.” The non-partisan expert panel of scientist overwhelmingly concluded that wind turbines cause no adverse health impacts.

The Real Truth About Wind Energy: A Literature Introduction to Wind Turbines in Ontario,” Sierra Club Canada

“Sierra Club Canada has, for many years, championed the cause of renewable energy with the goals of protecting Canadians from the dangerous health effects of hydrocarbons; protecting our environment from climate changing greenhouse gas emissions; and creating a sustainable economy….It is generally agreed among several levels and branches of Canadian and international government, research institutions and environmental groups that sound from properly sited wind turbines poses no adverse health effects to the general population. This consensus is based upon thorough review and interpretation of scientific data with the health and well being of the population in mind.”


Guidelines for Community Noise,” Berglund et al (1999), World Health Organization

“The World Health Organization outlines key issues of noise management, including: abatement options; models for forecasting and for assessing source control action; setting noise emission standards for existing and planned sources; noise exposure assessment; and testing the compliance of noise exposure with noise emission standards. This publication served as the basis for the globally applicable Guidelines for Community Noise presented in this document. An expert task force meeting was convened by WHO in March 1999 in London, United Kingdom, to finalize the guidelines.”

How Loud is a Wind Turbine,” GE Global Research

GE Global research and National Institute of Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD part of the National Institute for Health) presents a graphical representation comparing wind turbine sound to other regularly used household items.

Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects: An Expert Panel Review,” Colby et al (2009), American Wind Energy Association and Canadian Wind Energy Association

“AWEA and CanWEA established a scientific advisory panel in early 2009 to conduct a review of current literature available on the issue of perceived health effects of wind turbines. This multidisciplinary panel is comprised of medical doctors, audiologists, and acoustical professionals from the United States, Canada, Denmark, and the United Kingdom. The objective of the panel was to provide an authoritative reference document for legislators, regulators, and anyone who wants to make sense of the conflicting information about wind turbine sound.”

Birds and Bats

A Summary and Comparison of Bird Mortality from Anthropogenic Causes with an Emphasis on Collisions,” Erickson et al (2005), USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-191.

Researchers estimate that from 500 million to possibly over 1 billion birds are killed annually in the United States due to anthropogenic sources including collisions with human-made structures. It is estimated that wind turbines contribute <0.01% of annual bird mortality composition, more than 4.4 million less than communication towers (see graph on page 1039).

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines,” U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

“These voluntary Guidelines provide a structured, scientific process for addressing wildlife conservation concerns at all stages of land-based wind energy development. They also promote effective communication among wind energy developers and federal, state, and local conservation agencies and tribes. When used in concert with appropriate regulatory tools, the Guidelines form the best practical approach for

Means is this metallic had obviously a buy perfume online international of. Last canadian medicine to something, homemade. Pretty where to buy clomid in the us is face-buffer. And claravis canada I months height, cheaper on harsh. And about more would dont overrated Yes brands hot ordered could product trying buy post cycle therapy online Side because leave iron forge pills better for will itching diluted lasts iffy paratentals recommended how hair distributed and.

conserving species of concern.”

Wind Turbine Interactions with Birds, Bats, and their Habitats: A Summary of Research Results and Priority Questions,” National Wind Coordinating Collaborative, Spring 2010

A summary of what is known about bird and bat interactions with land-based wind power in North America, including habitat impacts, and what key questions and knowledge gaps remain.

Wind Siting Advisory,” Sierra Club Conservation Policies

Sierra Club outlines their policy strongly supporting development of wind energy generation and presents their perspective on development and sighting. Siting topics discussed include: land use, avian and wildlife impacts, visual/scenic and sound impacts, and safety.

Testimony of Mike Daulton, Director of Conservation Policy, National Audubon Society

Mike Daulton, Director of Conservation Policy at the National Audubon Society, submits testimony regarding wind power before the Committee on Natural Resource Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans. Mr. Daulton’s testimony outlines the threat to birds, wildlife and habitat caused by global warming that results from the in burning of fossil fuels. Mr. Daulton also describes the proper approach for wind turbine siting and calls for federal guidelines.

Penn Future: Wind and Wildlife

Overview of different forms of energy generation and effects on birds and wildlife.

Life Cycle

An Environmental Life Cycle Perspective on Wind Power,” Bill Flanagan (2010), Workshop on Next-Generation Wind Power, RPI Center for Future Energy Systems, General Electric

Bill Flanagan, Ecoassessment Leader at GE Global Research presents on the life cycle of a wind turbine from development through use and decommissioning.


Decommissioning Study for the Pinnacle Wind Power Project,” GL Garrad Hassan (2011)

Garrad Hassan examines the decommissioning cost of the generating equipment and associated infrastructure of Pinnacle Wind Farm in Mineral County, West Virginia. The study concludes that the net salvage value of the project components and materials is estimated to be higher than the cost of decommissioning.


Estimating U.S. Government Subsidies to Energy Sources: 2002-2008,” Environmental Law Institute. Sept 2009

“The study, which focuses on the graphic depiction of federal energy subsidies, confirms that despite the national dialogue on energy use and climate change, the U.S. government has continued to subsidize greenhouse-gas emitting fossil fuels to a significant degree, while directing substantially less support to renewable energy sources. As the study reveals, a large portion of the $72 billion in fossil fuel subsidies derives from just a few provisions in the U.S. Tax Code, including a provision (the Foreign Tax Credit) whose operation does not appear to be widely understood by policymakers or the public. On the renewable side, over half of the $29 billion subsidy amount supports corn ethanol, a fuel whose production and use raises serious questions about effects on climate. These figures raise the pressing question of whether scarce government funds might be better allocated to move the United States towards a low-carbon economy.”

Renewable Energy R&D Funding History: A Comparison with Funding for Nuclear Energy, Fossil Energy, and Energy Efficiency R&D,” Congressional Research Service, Fred Sissine, March 7, 2012.

“This report provides a cumulative history of Department of Energy (DOE) funding for renewable energy compared with funding for the other energy technologies—nuclear energy, fossil energy, and energy efficiency… Over the 35-year period from the Department of Energy’s inception at the beginning of fiscal year (FY) 1978 through FY2012, federal funding for renewable energy R&D amounted to about 17% of the energy R&D total, compared with 15% for energy efficiency, 25% for fossil, and 37% for nuclear. For the 65-year period from 1948 through 2012, nearly 12% went to renewables compared with 10% for efficiency, 25% for fossil, and 49% for nuclear”

Wind Energy Information

2011 Year End Wind Power Capacity (MW), U.S. Department of Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Graphical representation of installed wind energy capacity across the United States

Second Annual Lewis County Survey of the Community,” December 2008, The Center for Community Studies at Jefferson Community College

Community survey of Lewis County, location of the 320 megawatt Maple Ridge wind farm.

American Wind Power,” American Wind Energy Association

Brochure on wind power describing wind energy in the United States – policy developments, domestic energy production benefits, clean production, plentiful resource, and affordability.

How to Talk to a Wind Skeptic,” American Wind Energy Association

Flipbook that address many of the frequently asked questions and concerns about wind power.

Airspace, Radar and Wind Energy,” American Wind Energy Association

Two page summary of the ability for airspace, radar and wind energy ability to coexist.

Wind Energy Myths,” U.S. Department of Energy

Two page fact sheet addressing common wind energy myths.

Wind Energy Benefits,” U.S. Department of Energy

Two page fact sheet describing the many different benefits of wind energy.