Eastern Oregon turbines. Photo by Ted Timmons.
The growing debate over wind farms and their impacts on the environment were laid out before a group of state regulators Friday afternoon in Hood River.
The Energy Facility Siting Council (EFSC) is being asked to clear up confusion over how to define a “large” wind farm. It’s important because large projects are regulated by the state, while smaller projects are controlled by counties. The state process is more complex, costs more, and has tougher environmental standards.
Environmental groups says some developers are artificially breaking up large wind farms into smaller projects so they can dodge state regulations. They want the EFSC to adopt new rules that will make it harder to do that.
Bob Sallinger with the Portland Audubon Society told the council that changing the rule is necessary to protect the environment of Eastern Oregon from expansive wind farm development. “These projects are rapidly changing our landscape. We’re developing wind energy projects at a rate that’s unprecedented and in places where we never anticipated they would go,” he says. “They’re probably going to change our landscape more than any other development aspect over the next 20 or 30 years.”
The environmental groups are particularly concerned about the Greater Sage Grouse. Recently, the Interior Department said the sage grouse is in so much trouble, it deserves the protection of the Endangered Species Act. But it put off listing the bird because there are so many other species of wildlife that are in worse shape.
If the sage grouse is to recover, Oregon will play a big role. ODFW says the state has 20% of the bird’s remaining habitat. The environmental groups say that without more state control, large wind farms could fragment the habitat. In other words – break it up into small and disconnected chunks where the grouse will have a harder time surviving.
“Much of Eastern Oregon,” says Dave Decker of the Oregon Natural Desert Association (ONDA), “is one of the remaining core areas for greater sage grouse. He describes Interior’s decision as, “A clear call from the federal agencies that look at this bird, to all of that state that have core sage grouse habitat, to really step up protections for them.”
Opponents of the rule change didn’t directly challenge the environmental arguments. Instead, they said there’s very little evidence that wind developers are trying to avoid state regulations by breaking up large projects into smaller ones.
The project that set off alarms in the environmental community are three wind farms planned for the Steens Mountain area in Harney County. The idea of wind turbines on one of the state’s best known icons offended many, plus the area has considerable sage brush habitat.
What also ticked off environmentalists is that all three of the wind farms are 104 megawatts, just small enough to avoid the state siting process. They says the three wind farms should be treated as one large project, noting that one developer is building all of them, that the projects are located next to each other and share a transmission line.
Columbia Energy Partners of Vancouver is the company behind them. President Chris Crowley told the council they’ve withdrawn the county applications for parts two and three, and will submit them to the state. Because of that, he says, the environmental groups no longer have anything to complain about.
Harney County Judge Steve Grasty agreed there’s little other evidence that wind developers are trying to skirt state regulations. He also called the proposed rule change an attack on Oregon’s land use planning system. And like another local official at the meeting, said he was offended by the suggestion that counties aren’t capable of making complex land use decisions.
Grasty says the wind farms will provide a badly need economic boost to the county, which currently has some of the highest levels of unemployment in the state. He blamed environmentalists for Harney County’s economic troubles. “They stop everything we try to do,” says Grasty. “We’ve seen this over and over.”
The members of the council agreed to take in more public comments during the next several weeks and plan to vote on whether or not to move forward at their next meeting at the end of April.
Hi Dennis — I was at the same meeting today, and spoke with you briefly afterwards. You’ve provided a great summary here of a very important and complex issue. Thanks!
While at the Washington EFSEC Meeting we were told by Tammy Talburt they are getting complaints about the flash and noise these farms create. Patty Murray’s site in Dec. listed BPA seeking 2 million to research storage of wind energy from these farms. This was Dec.2-4 in Washington D.C with BPA leading many of the lectures. Huge Farms are going up and we cannot even store this energy yet. Few are discussing the blinding flash and disturbing noise wind towers make. In November at the Clark College BPA informational meeting the Environmental Rep. pointed out an area in Chelatchie Prairie on Line#29 of the I-5 Corridor Reinforcement Project where BPA would like to place a wind farm. Are there any in wooded areas like this? Doug Johnson who has been at the forefront of the I-5 Corridor Project was just on Channel 2 discussing the green of wind. I have learned their are many creeks in said area with critical Coho, Chinook, Chum and Steelhead habitat. This was confirmed to me Friday by the Lower Columbia Fish Enhancement Group at the Energy Trust Better Living Show. I also met OregonWild, Opal Creek & OreCat there. I wish I knew how to help people know, see, and value what I see in the natural world right here in Southwest Washington before it is gone. If you do not spend 2 million it has no value.
[...] book, most of the debate about the environmental effects of wind farms was focused on cost and effects on native species of plants and animals. By revealing the possible effects that these wind farms have on humans, Dr. Pierpont hopes that [...]