Falmouth Wind Turbine Relocation Study Fatal Flaws

Introduction

The Town of Falmouth owns two commercial Vestas V-82 type 1.65 megawatt wind turbines installed with no permits both have been permanently shut down in 2017 by the Massachusetts courts. There is a third Vestas V-82 in town owned by a private company still operating with a permit. That private-owned turbine, by the way, has had massive expensive gearbox replacement parts done with specialized crane service.

These turbines it was discovered after installation generate 110 decibels of noise each equal to a hard rock band playing 24/7. There are no studies of two or three operating at the same time. Logic only says they would be two to three times louder than one. The courts have deemed the Falmouth town-owned wind turbines a nuisance.

The Town of Falmouth continues to hide the August 2010 Vestas 110 decibel noise warning letter from the public.

The Town of Falmouth is considering moving the wind turbines in which Falmouth Town Meeting approved 2.5 million dollars to take down the wind turbines based on engineering plans. The plans do not include long term storage in which case town meeting will be asked for more money. The town needs to build a Quonset hut or similar building to store the antiquated equipment.

The town wind turbine project engineering company is today the same firm that conducted the design and bidding of wind turbines before construction of the turbines in 2010 and 2012. The engineering firm prior to construction also had access to a study done for the Town of Falmouth done by KEMA Inc in 2005 that showed 99 homes could be affected by noise from just one General Electric domestic wind turbine.

General Electric refused to place a single wind turbine because of residential setbacks and ice throw.

Engineering Plans Omits Efficiency Ratings - Turbines Lose Production Every Year As Much As Half In 15 Years

Important information is missing or has been omitted from the most recent engineering analysis. How much power do the turbines produce today as compared to when they were brand new?

Wind industry reports conclude that a wind turbine will typically generate more than twice as much electricity in its first year than when it is 15 years old. The Falmouth wind turbines were designed in the late 1990s, built-in 2005 and placed in storage in Texas for years. The turbines today are almost 15 years old.

The Falmouth wind turbines by wind industry standards are dinosaurs. The average life expectancy was at the time of construction considered 20 to 25 years but because of gearbox failures and blade wear, the life span has dropped significantly. It's cheaper to buy a brand new more efficient turbine than to repair the old one.

The wind turbine blades from this era tend to crack and the cutting edge of the blades wear out as nothing lasts forever. The blades lose 1 to as much as 2 percent of their power per year much like a pair of ice skate blades.

To put it another way, the wind turbines have a load factor or what is called the efficiency rating based on the percentage of electricity it actually produces compared with its theoretical maximum. You can say that a brand new wind turbine operates at a certain percent efficiency when the turbine first goes into operation and 15 years later could drop to as much as half. These facts are being hidden from the public again like the noise warnings prior to construction.

As they say: fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. After being tricked once, one should learn from one's mistakes and avoid being tricked in the same way.

The town wind turbines are named Wind I and Wind II. The engineering report states that if Falmouth Wind II is moved the parts for Wind I can be used for Falmouth Wind II.

Wind turbine blades wear out equally if you replace one blade you have to replace all the blades at a cost today of one million per blade for a total of three million for all three. The turbines' original purchase price was 2.6 million each in 2005.

The current town engineering analysis suggests that the proposed project to move Wind II is financially attractive with a substantially positive Net Present Value of around 6 million yet the turbine cost brand new was 2.6 million. The 20-year net cash flow is estimated to be 9 million but assumes the 5 million in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act remains a grant. It was never a grant it was always a loan.

The current engineering report leaves out the capital cost of the wind turbine was provided in the form of an ARRA grant. The Massachusetts Clean Water Trust voted to require the Town of Falmouth to pay back the remainder to the 5 million loans of 3.5 million at zero percent over the next years. The town owes 3.5 million in addition to the engineering report.

It's obvious to the most casual observer that the Town of Falmouth could go out and buy a larger brand new megawatt wind turbine today for under 4 million dollars and operate it at another location for far less than what they are doing.

Regulatory Capture

Regulatory capture is an economic theory that says regulatory agencies such as the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection come to be dominated by the wind turbine industry they are charged with regulating. The result is that MassDEP, charged with acting in the public interest with safety and health, instead acts in ways that benefit the wind turbine industry it is supposed to be regulating

The damage being done to Falmouth taxpayers is being done by Governor Charlie Baker through his executive office in charge of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection brokered the project regulatory agreement on Falmouth Wind II. The loan of 5 million dollars used funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 that required Falmouth Wind II to remain an energy-efficient project or the money had to be paid back at 2 percent interest.

MassDEP always knew using the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds created a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety but hid noise warning documents even while applying for a waiver from the Federal Environmental Protection Agency to buy the foreign-made Falmouth Wind II turbine. General Electric a domestic wind company refused to build a smaller single commercial wind turbine in Falmouth.

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection project regulatory agreement required that everyone involved in the ARRA loan had to ignore all health and safety issues known prior to the construction of the first Falmouth wind turbine I. MassDEP put themselves in what is called regulatory capture. MassDEP became a broker for the wind turbine industry with total disregard for the health and property rights of any citizen in Massachusetts.

Quid Pro Quo

Quid Pro Quo a favor or advantage granted or expected in return for something.

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection gave out environmental awards to any company or contractor that advanced the wind turbine agenda of 2000 megawatts of wind turbine power by the year 2020.

To prove the point of Quid Pro Quo the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection never gave an award to an acoustician, company or contractor that produced wind turbine studies showing health, safety or the financial issues with turbines aka MassDEP is in bed with the wind turbine industry.

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection an advocate for the wind turbine industry held meetings for ten years with local wind turbine groups from twenty-one communities begging to stop the shadow flicker and noise described as torture from the wind turbines. MassDEP is still holding the same meetings ten years later.

The Falmouth wind turbine engineering company and other wind turbine related contractors received awards from the MassDEP. These awards pointed to the companies the MassDEP backed to install wind turbines. A financial boom for any company producing positive installation reports for the wind turbine agenda

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection has never asked the Massachusetts Department of Public Health to interview a single wind turbine victim in Massachusetts as they already knew the turbines were detrimental to health prior to the installations and had known as a result of the body of research led by Dr Neil Kelley, including infrasound and low-frequency noise, NASA research published in 1987.

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection executive branch of state government with the help of the wind turbine industry over the past ten years coordinated the taking of health and property rights in twenty-one Massachusetts communities.

Any company associated with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection does not have your health, property and financial interest only their own financial interest and the wind turbine agenda

On all counts, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and anyone associated with them is guilty of taking health and property rights with no compensation.

The Executive Branch (Governors Office) oversees the programs and services offered by the state, including MassDEP.

MassDEP serves the Commonwealth failed to enforce laws that protect our air, land, water and help citizens with local environmental issues regarding health and property rights.