Windmills coming to public land near you

[WyoDoug]

This is damaging to habitat. First they cut a wide swath of land around where they install each one and put a fairly large concrete pad. They have a bad tendency to leak hydraulic oil which gets into the groundwater. They use roughly 50-100 gallons of hydraulic oil a month because of the leakage so I fail to see how earth friendly they are. Least that is the case with the ones near Cheyenne. In addition, they have to cut roads to service them. None of that is environmentally friendly.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Greg Gianforte R (MT) and Rob Bishop R (UT) are co sponsors... so yeah I'm sure it's going to be great for public lands and wildlife.

 

[Ben Lamb]

All development has an impact. It's how you plan, site & mitigate that activity that matters.

I'm not a fan of large-scale development on public lands either, regardless of the energy source, but we live in a nation that has decided to develop those resources and while we can argue about the merit of specific projects, denying the ability of an industry to use the same resources that every other swinging dick can use is kind of unAmerican, no?

Roof top solar and urban wind farms could go a long way to solving this issue, and take out those stupid freaking magpies that wake me up every morning at 5 am.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

All development has an impact. It's how you plan, site & mitigate that activity that matters.

I'm not a fan of large-scale development on public lands either, regardless of the energy source, but we live in a nation that has decided to develop those resources and while we can argue about the merit of specific projects, denying the ability of an industry to use the same resources that every other swinging dick can use is kind of unAmerican, no?

Roof top solar and urban wind farms could go a long way to solving this issue, and take out those stupid freaking magpies that wake me up every morning at 5 am.

I don't want OG E&Ps to be out there either.

The "billion dollar" solutions are the products of lazy minds. It's easy to conceive and then throw money at a big damn, power plant, etc. We need our law makers to focus on the million $1000 solutions, they create more jobs in the long run and are more effective than a monolithic project.

 

[Zach]

All development has an impact. It's how you plan, site & mitigate that activity that matters.

I'm not a fan of large-scale development on public lands either, regardless of the energy source, but we live in a nation that has decided to develop those resources and while we can argue about the merit of specific projects, denying the ability of an industry to use the same resources that every other swinging dick can use is kind of unAmerican, no?

Roof top solar and urban wind farms could go a long way to solving this issue, and take out those stupid freaking magpies that wake me up every morning at 5 am.

You should be thankful your magpies wait till 5am.... Mine are up much earlier.

 

[icebreaker12]

The only thing I can see that has BHA behind this is, "It's going to happen anyway, so might as well send some money to wildlife in the process."

 

[beginnerhunter]

Man, it would be cool if there existed a reliable source of low carbon energy that didn't use up a couple of states worth of the landscape. One whose fuel could be obtained from, say, seawater? Oh well...

 

[bobbydean]

New Mexico has an extensive amount of wind farms. Love the source of energy. I am concerned with migrant bird health and bird health period. I think there could be research to deter the birds. High pitched noises, owl figurines, or some other deterrent. It cannot be that difficult. I think there can be an answer. Find one and make money!

 

[hank4elk]

New one has been propossed near me on BLM. Yeah they're kinda ugly & do have effects. Much rather have that than a landscape like Bloomfield or Artesia/Permian & that toxic mess that someones kid will pay for.

 

[sharpshooter97]

There is an area in eastern ND with a ton of wind towers, I hate them. Mostly for the fact that it changes the look of the landscape and they really aren’t that efficient when it isn’t windy. I used to bowhunt on a small chunk of land and the neighboring land had a few, when it was calm and quiet all I could hear was the dang windmills and it annoyed me so much I pretty much quit hunting it.

 

[WyoDoug]

I don't want OG E&Ps to be out there either.

The "billion dollar" solutions are the products of lazy minds. It's easy to conceive and then throw money at a big damn, power plant, etc. We need our law makers to focus on the million $1000 solutions, they create more jobs in the long run and are more effective than a monolithic project.

But then the political types don't get paybacks or donations to their campaigns so they are not likely to focus on the smaller projects.

 

[Ben Lamb]

You should be thankful your magpies wait till 5am.... Mine are up much earlier.

Yours are all whacked out on magic mushrooms and the dope because you live in CO. Mine are all good, christian magpies because they live in MT. This is peer reviewed science.

Wllm, amen. We have tons of already developed landscapes that could host solar and wind on a scale that would make it viable, reduce dependence on monopolistic utilities and create an economic boom the likes of which we've not seen since industrialization, but the big money boys don't want to get in that game, nor do they want others to do so, which is why we're seeing so many states try to limit the viability of roof-top solar in favor of massive utility projects.

It's incredibly short-sighted thinking.

 

[npaden]

It would be interesting to really compare the net energy provided from a wind farm vs. from a oilfield. I know that as a landowner the amount I would receive would be at least 10 times more from a decent oil well than from the biggest windmill they make.

As a landowner I'm not sure which I would rather have on my property, but I currently have both an oil lease that they have never exercised the right to drill on, and a wind lease that they are always telling me that they are about to start construction (they've been saying that for almost 5 years now). As a landowner the wind lease is WAY more restrictive than the oil lease. Not sure how you could get away with those types of restrictions on public land. I can't rifle hunt on my own property when they are under construction, I have to get anyone that hunts on my property to sign a waiver saying that if they damage the wind turbine they are liable for it, I can't plant trees that will grow to over 30 feet on my own property without their permission, I'm sure there are a few more that would be pretty tricky on public land. I think the term is for 50 years on the wind lease too.

 

[theat]

I get that some find them to be ugly, but for some reason I think they are kind of majestic looking. Although, if I had to look at a hundred of them out my window every day I think that would change quickly. I spent some time working around a big wind farm in north central Montana a few years ago. As far as I know it was all or mostly all on private agricultural lands. I spoke to a couple of the wheat farmers who owned the land and none of them seemed too bothered by the turbines. They mentioned that at first the sight and sound of them was a bit annoying, but after awhile they hardly noticed them anymore. I also asked if they find many dead birds or have any other wildlife issues related to the wind farm. They both said they see dead birds occasionally but not as many as they were expecting. One of the farmers said that he worries more about trespassing/poaching due to the increase of gravel access roads on his property, but the other said the opposite since he has made friends with some of the maintenance people and they keep and eye out for him. Not sure how much it pertains to other wind developments, but at this one the footprint for each windmill was basically the diameter of the base and a tiny shed right against it.

 

[Nameless Range]

Interesting conversation.

If we are just talking about feelings, I don’t like any development on public land. It takes the natural beauty of a place and ruins it. I don’t ever think I’ve seen an oil rig, or a dam, or a windmill, and thought, “ This place is way better now that that’s here.”

Of course the way I feel about something has no bearing on whether or not it is necessary or true. Very real arguments could be made that the oil fields, strip mines, giant pits in the earth, dams, and windmills are all necessary to a certain degree on our public lands, for the greater good and continuance of our quality-of-life.

But I will never buy an argument that they are beautiful in such a way that they are an improvement on the land. Anywhere those things occur, we are making a sacrifice. We are destroying those chunks of earth- either temporarily or forever. They are like any subdivision - just for a different purpose.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Interesting conversation.

If we are just talking about feelings, I don’t like any development on public land. It takes the natural beauty of a place and ruins it. I don’t ever think I’ve seen an oil rig, or a dam, or a windmill, and thought, “ This place is way better now that that’s here.”

Of course the way I feel about something has no bearing on whether or not it is necessary or true. Very real arguments could be made that the oil fields, strip mines, giant pits in the earth, dams, and windmills are all necessary to a certain degree on our public lands, for the greater good and continuance of our quality-of-life.

But I will never buy an argument that they are beautiful in such a way that they are an improvement on the land. Anywhere those things occur, we are making a sacrifice. We are destroying those chunks of earth- either temporarily or forever. They are like any subdivision - just for a different purpose.

1000% this.

And we're running out of places to sacrifice.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

And we're running out of places to sacrifice.

And it's a sacrifice to line someone else's pocket, let's be clear here the primary reason people want to develop energy on public land is because they can do so for way below market value.

 

[Ben Lamb]

And it's a sacrifice to line someone else's pocket, let's be clear here the primary reason people want to develop energy on public land is because they can do so for way below market value.

And control the regulators.

 

[LopeHunter]

I thought wind farms and solar farms needed to be near a main line of the regional power grid? That would limit where installations could be located. I have turkey hunted in the autumn on lands that had dozens of the wind towers and I found them peaceful to observe as I waited for some turkey action. There is a hum or white noise that does not bother me. Lots of turkey and deer before the towers went in and lots while I was hunting so wildlife there either did not care or simply adjusted. Tractors make noise, trucks and cars on interstates make noise and whitewater makes noise. Wind blowing through barb wired fence can make noise. I like renewable so comparing fracking footprints and traffic created and the impact from leaking or left behind chemicals and waste is easy for me to say which I prefer...wind power. I have never been around a massive solar array so no observations about impact on wildlife and the land.

 

[MJE2083]

I'm clearly not an expert, but why does these wind turbines always seem to be placed in nice natural areas away from civilization. Why can't be build wind turbines on top of skyscrapers? Or replace every cell phone/radio tower with a wind turbine/cell phone tower combo?