# Lake Michigan Wind Farms Just say NO!



## adjusted3

My friends, 

This past Monday, Feb 8th, our great state just awarded 1.34 million in state grants coupled with the 1.4 million federal grants to study feasability of installing wind farms in Lake Michigan. Guys, I am all for going green and alternitive energy, but this is way beyond my moral boundries. Tossing 2.74 million at studing the feasibility of wind farms in Lake Michigan is another topic of pizzed off discussion, that is for another thread, but having to dodge windmills in Lake michigan is what this threads purpose is. 

I for one do not want them in my lake. 

I have taken 100+ sunset photos off the back of my boat and the last thing I want is to see a windmill in the background. I enjoy the lake because of the peace and solitude, good friends and great fishing. The last thing I want to expierance is the whomp whomp whomp of a turbine 5 miles off shore. There has to be another way. We need to strongly encourage the prevention of these farms. There has been zero studies, that I am aware of, on the fishery impact. The has been no studies, again that I am aware of, on the impact of navigation. maybe on commercial navigation, but not on the impact of fishing navigation. We allready are dodging nets and buoys, now fans?

I am so dissapointed in Michigan's decisision to support this. Let's not make this a political issue, let make this a fishing issue. Do not allow our state to polute our Great Lakes with wind farms. 

Mark


----------



## nategyoder

I am all for alternative energy. I really would like to see more nuclear energy. I hear your concern though. I for one am much more worried about the birds than I am the fish. These things are really hard on birds. If it was just going to thin out some seagulls no big deal but I bet the ducks and geese would take a pretty big hit. No proof behind any of this just concerns I have.


----------



## ESOX

Having fished the offshore oil rigs in the gulf, all I can say is bring it on. Talk about artificial structure and fish magnets..


----------



## wartfroggy

nategyoder said:


> I am all for alternative energy. I really would like to see more nuclear energy. I hear your concern though. I for one am much more worried about the birds than I am the fish. These things are really hard on birds. If it was just going to thin out some seagulls no big deal but I bet the ducks and geese would take a pretty big hit. No proof behind any of this just concerns I have.


Sure, some birds would be killed. I have alot of birds that fly into my big windows of the house. Should I take out the windows? I have hit a few birds with my car too. Hit a hawk once while driving early in the morning, and busted my head light. Should we ban cars? 

I am not overly concerned about the bird mortality rate. Most bird migrations are closer to shore than the proposed positions of the windmills. I am not overly worried about impacts on the fishery during operation. I am a little concerned with fishery impacts during installation/construction. I am not too worried about seeing the windmills on the horizon. Not too worried about ruining someones sunset, I don't think the impacts will be that bad. I am not sure how anal they will be about keeping people from boating/fishing around them. That could be a concern. Another thing, they aren't very efficient, so it doesn't seem to me that the cost of installation is worth the low return. 

I really don't care for the idea in general, as alot of people don't, but most of their excuses and arguments don't seem to hold a ton of water either. I can't give you a great reason that I don't really want them here, I just don't. At least I can admit it. And, if they come, I'll get over it.


----------



## adjusted3

ESOX said:


> Having fished the offshore oil rigs in the gulf, all I can say is bring it on. Talk about artificial structure and fish magnets..


Paul, I agree, I too have fished the Oil riggs....But that is salt water fish. those fish are dumb.....

We are talking about fresh water. 

I am invisioning trying to navigate thru 100 mills at 4:30 in the morning out of St. Joe. Yes I know they are proposed to be off shore from Silver Lake....but it is only a matter of time. 

Mark


----------



## fishsniffer

is the government gonna make it a secured area and not let you within a mile of it becouse they might think youre gonna bomb it...


----------



## Fishndude

I have to think that most of the birds which might be killed by Lake Michigan windmills would be Seagulls and Cormorants - both of which we could do fine with fewer of. But you should realize that this would just be bringing money into Michigan's desperate economy. Every time the economy tanks, Michigan jumps up and starts clamoring about building an alternative energy mecca. Then, before it gets done, the economy rebounds, everyone goes back to work manufacturing, and nothing ever really gets completed. 

If the President really wanted to create jobs, spend Federal money to bolster our economy, and go down in history in a good way, he would set up a govt agency to build a national recycling program, which would be subsidized by the government - but would be operated by the private sector. 
You can't create jobs in the auto industry, unless more people start buying cars. Establishing a national recycling program would CREATE new jobs, reduce landfill, and could be operated by private enterprise, but be overseen by government agencies. It would probably take a lot more thought and work than just throwing money at stuff that already exists, in vague sorts of ways.


----------



## Stinky

once that dam carp gets into the lake it won't be any good for fishing anyway and they are not doing anything about that. Besides you can mark the windmills on your GPS and you shouldnt have any problem missing them.


----------



## quest32a

Its the whole not in my backyard arguement. The folks with money that live along the dunes do not want them on shore, and the folks that use Lake Michigan do not want them in the water. Someone is going to have to give. 

Up in Sault St Marie you can see numerous windmills on the Canadian side, really not eyesore at all. They stick just above the tree line. 

Honestly, I think it is probably a good idea. We need to stop our reliance on fossil fuel. Someone is going to have to give on this one.


----------



## Michihunter

quest32a said:


> Its the whole not in my backyard arguement. The folks with money that live along the dunes do not want them on shore, and the folks that use Lake Michigan do not want them in the water. Someone is going to have to give.
> 
> Up in Sault St Marie you can see numerous windmills on the Canadien side, really not eyesore at all. They stick just above the tree line.
> 
> Honestly, I think it is probably a good idea. We need to stop our reliance on fossil fuel. Someone is going to have to give on this one.


I'd have to agree. Of course it ain't my back yard but the arguments I'm hearing are weak at best. Navigate through them? I'm quite sure they'll be marked and lighted and a lot less risky than another boat out on the water. Bird kills? Is that even a serious argument? Eyesore? There's plenty of worthless eyesores that should take precedent over something that can be used as a low cost energy supply.


----------



## FISH

So, since it will be in michigan waters, we SHOULD get a kickback from it. i see it the same as with Alaska and oil. Maybe i'm way off on my point. does anyone else think this?


----------



## nategyoder

Michihunter said:


> Bird kills? Is that even a serious argument?


http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm

http://www.cleveland.com/neobirding/index.ssf/2009/05/mitigating_windmills_threat_to.html

No It is not an argument. It is a concern that I and others have had. I said I was in favor of alternative energy. I am tired of giving our money to the middle east! I simply stated I would be more concerned about the birds than the fish. They have been working on improving the design and placement of windmills for years and I am sure this will be a consideration here. I am all for bringing more jobs and money to Michigan!


----------



## Michihunter

nategyoder said:


> http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm
> 
> http://www.cleveland.com/neobirding/index.ssf/2009/05/mitigating_windmills_threat_to.html
> 
> No It is not an argument. It is a concern that I and others have had. I said I was in favor of alternative energy. I am tired of giving our money to the middle east! I simply stated I would be more concerned about the birds than the fish. They have been working on improving the design and placement of windmills for years and I am sure this will be a consideration here. I am all for bringing more jobs and money to Michigan!


Appreciate the clarification.


----------



## West Side AK

ESOX said:


> Having fished the offshore oil rigs in the gulf, all I can say is bring it on. Talk about artificial structure and fish magnets..


I AGREE! Some Offshore structure would be awesome... Pros and cons of all decisions tho... I havn't made up my mind yet...


----------



## Silver Panner

Screw the birds and fish, I think these could be detrimental to the Monarch Butterflies! How are they supposed to navigate through this?!?!


----------



## fathom this

It baffles me why we can't leave one of the worlds greatest wonders alone. Invasive species? Wind turbines? Water diversion to other states? 
The view of the sunset over the lake is worth more than any monatary value we may incure from turbines. These turbines can't even come close to what one nuke plant can produce. Leave the d##### lakes alone!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The more we let the feds do to the lakes the more control they will have over this precious resource.


----------



## Frantz

I do not have a lot of reasons not to let it happen. I do however have conditions, should this happen within the MI boundary waters.

1. Very limited "no sail" zones.

2. At least 75% ($$$$ wise) of ALL products used in the manufacturing and upkeep of these units MUST be American made by a business based within the United States of America.

3. ALL labor used must be LEGAL American workers.

4. A minimum of 50% of ALL products and labor MUST be from Michigan. To qualify for a position with the initial build of this farm, one must be a legal permanent resident of Michigan for at least 2 years.

More to follow.


----------



## earl

I think a trial wind farm near the project is a reasonable starting place.


----------



## overworked

My 2cents is that both wind and nuke is wrong for this state we have a huge resource of biomass here! We need more cogeneration plants! Not some wind mill that takes 3 people to oversee. How about a co gen that takes 20 and 100 loggers and even more support people to operate? Not to mention the millions in tax revenue.I love our great lakes and the rivers we have here and wind power will not turn out any better than our dams have for us sportsman!


----------



## jlcrss

You think windmills are bad wait till they start drilling out there.


----------



## Far Beyond Driven

1 mainiac speaks with wisdom.

Most of our nuke plants are reaching the end of their lives and keep getting 1 year continuations. There's only so much bombardment the vessels can take. At last check they were pushing 25-30% of our energy, what happens when they get phased out? Hopefully new reactors at the same sites.....

I'm waiting for the Little Manistee Band to weigh in. This is their historical fishing grounds you know, and they possible hit to their netting operations needs to be considered. I have this picture in my head, of a LRB Indian, standing on the bow of his diesel tug with DNR purchased nets in the background, looking over the rows of windfarms on the lake, tear coming down his face.


----------



## Big Frank 25

Carbon capture ready coal fired power houses.


----------



## sullyxlh

adjusted3 said:


> Tossing 2.74 million at studing the feasibility of wind farms in Lake Michigan is another topic of pizzed off discussion....


Windmills have been around a long time
it sure as hell don't take no 2.7 mil to know what they're capable of
They paid it to a bunch of suck pumps that are gonna tell the state what they want to hear not whats good for the state.
For 20k you can have your own windmill in your backyard that'll handle more power than one will ever need and still have enough leftover to sell back to the utilities.


----------



## Ephemeroptera

Good post. Higher energy costs plus mass production of wind and solar tech plus much better batteries for storage = higher incentive to take homes off the grid. Last April during the snow outage a Consumers guy told me I should provide mine own power if I wanted 100% reliability. More possible today than ten years ago.


----------



## 1mainiac

sullyxlh said:


> Windmills have been around a long time
> it sure as hell don't take no 2.7 mil to know what they're capable of
> They paid it to a bunch of suck pumps that are gonna tell the state what they want to hear not whats good for the state.
> For 20k you can have your own windmill in your backyard that'll handle more power than one will ever need and still have enough leftover to sell back to the utilities.


Send me the info on the 20k windmill. The one built in Grand Rapids puts out 1400w under ideal conditions which is 24mph wind or better and last quote I saw was just over 4g plus install. Based on my electric bill my 3 bedroom 1500sq home would need a minimum of 8 of them under idea conditions. Somewhere amongest my clutter of dumb ideas is the quote I got 3 years ago to power my home and be able to sell some excess to the power company.The reason it is tossed in my junk pile which may have been burned my wife hates my clutter pile is the cost was just under 200g and included install. I don't know about you guys but I doubt I will live long enough to save even 20g on my electric bills. Which currently budget at around 60 bucks a month. White Bear says there is no cost too much to save the enviroment I don't agree that is the same thinking that got us to the point we are approaching. I would agree some risks are too high but when you study what the planet has gone thru as it evolved I don't think there is much we can truely do to distroy the planet perhaps in some thoughts we should remove all human life from it as many beleive we are to blame for every problem. But the truth is We bombed Japan with the A bomb and while the effect was devastating Japan has survived and will likely own us one day. Our planet cleans itself and adapts to changes every day maybe not allways the way we want or think it should be but it was not that long ago many of our lakes and rivers were so polluted people said no life would ever return to them. Prior to that we removed all the trees and trashed every river and stream killing nearly all of the natural fish in them yet the water continued to flow and life continued on.


----------



## adjusted3

I let this go a few days, But let get back to fishing........

I fish the nets. they are 40' high and 1-2 miles long. The nets will not capture salmon. the holes are too small. but the salmon bump up aganst them and they, because of the temp zones, cannot swim under them or over the top. Incredible fishing if you know how to work them.

I cannot see a piling actracting fsh. 

But like others have said, do we wat to navigate thru them. Last count, from teh article Sat. was the Sweeden company was looking at between 100 to 200 structures off Sliver Beach off the Silver Beach Dunes. 

We need alternitive energry sources, Just not in my lake. 

Mark


----------



## FLAT RATE

Well guys, as the president of one Michigans largest Sport Fishing Organization I have to say that "personally" I am OPPOSED to any kind of "Wind Farms" anywhere in our waters. I am not even so sure about Wind Mills on land is as the best way to generate electricity on a large scale. 

I am all for alternative energy but lets not have a knee jerk reaction to putting up a few hunderd wind mills as the best way to do it. I have listened to members form the Governors Wind Council and tried to be objective but so far I am not sold on them. I have done a lot of research on the subject and frankly I think some of the peole are being sold a bill of goods and you are not being told the "whole" truth.

The other issue I have is that no one has decided who would be held responsible and pay to dismantel them when they are discovered to be not what some say they are cracked up to be or they are obsolete because of the "next" best thing. 

I think they could be a hazard to navigation, (some can't even make into the Pier Heads safe) they are an eyesore and I don't even live in the area, we run the risk of the area being a restricted area for fishing or boating, no one has any info. that I have seen on the mirgatory birds and fish issues, who will reap the benifits from them if they do by some miracle generate enough electricity as I don't think the Michigan voters will see much from our resource being exploited by some large company. 

Why are WE the Michigan Tax payers paying for any of the studies for some on else and providing any grants, the last I knew we were having a problem paying for our kids education in public schools and everyone has seen a cut in revenue sharing to our local cities and towns. I think it is time some of us start thinking about what is really important here, our resources and trying toget the Great State of Mich. back on track, but I have seen no guarantees that anyone from Mich will see any benifit at all from the wind farms. Sounds like another example of some one trying to take advantage of us while we are down.


----------



## WHITE BEAR

Windmills are just a step in the right direction. They are not going to or even expected to provide all the power we need. Everyone seems to be stuck on the idea that if it's not the be all and all it's not even worth it. That is the kind of thinking that has got us in the boat we are in now. Make no mistake, wind farms are coming, solar power is coming, geothermal is coming. These and other alternative energy sources are not perfect but now that they are becoming almost necessary, maybe with some more serious research and development we can make them more efficient and practical.


----------



## wartfroggy

adjusted3 said:


> I let this go a few days, But let get back to fishing........
> 
> I fish the nets. they are 40' high and 1-2 miles long. *The nets will not capture salmon....[/*QUOTE]
> 
> :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
> U so sure about that??


----------



## Sam22

ESOX said:


> Having fished the offshore oil rigs in the gulf, all I can say is bring it on. Talk about artificial structure and fish magnets..


That was my first thought. I am not sure it is a good or bad idea really.


----------



## Spanky

remcorebond said:


> Another thing is that i dont think this country is in any financial shape take a chance with unproven methods. Isnt this why there hasn't been much private investment in windmills? I mean wouldn't utility companies be trying to buy space in breezy places to take advantage of this new method of power production? Just questions i would like answers to. Iam not claiming to know much about power production its just from my observations wind mills dont pan out.


The west coast of the US and the Great lakes areas are some of the best areas for constant wind in this country.

Do you people know what a coal mine, or uranium mine look like and what they do to the landscape?:sad:

A quote from Wiki:

Environmental effects
Main article: Environmental effects of wind power

Livestock ignore wind turbines,[105] and continue to graze as they did before wind turbines were installed.Compared to the environmental effects of traditional energy sources, the environmental effects of wind power are relatively minor. Wind power consumes no fuel, and emits no air pollution, unlike fossil fuel power sources. The energy consumed to manufacture and transport the materials used to build a wind power plant is equal to the new energy produced by the plant within a few months of operation[citation needed]. Garrett Gross, a scientist from UMKC in Kansas City, Missouri states, "The impact made on the environment is very little when compared to what is gained." The initial carbon dioxide emission from energy used in the installation is "paid back" within about 9 months of operation for offshore turbines[citation needed].

Danger to birds and bats has been a concern in some locations. However, studies show that the number of birds killed by wind turbines is very low, compared to the number of those that die as a result of certain other ways of generating electricity and especially of the environmental impacts of using non-clean power sources. Fossil fuel generation kills around twenty times as many birds per unit of energy produced than wind-farms.[106] Bat species appear to be at risk during key movement periods. Almost nothing is known about current populations of these species and the impact on bat numbers as a result of mortality at windpower locations. Offshore wind sites 10 km or more from shore do not interact with bat populations. While a wind farm may cover a large area of land, many land uses such as agriculture are compatible, with only small areas of turbine foundations and infrastructure made unavailable for use.

Aesthetics have also been an issue. In the USA, the Massachusetts Cape Wind project was delayed for years mainly because of aesthetic concerns. In the UK, repeated opinion surveys have shown that more than 70% of people either like, or do not mind, the visual impact. According to a town councillor in Ardrossan, Scotland, the overwhelming majority of locals believe that the Ardrossan Wind Farm has enhanced the area, saying that the turbines are impressive looking and bring a calming effect to the town.[107]

Finally, noise has also been an important disadvantage. With careful implanting of the wind turbines, along with use of noise reducing-modifications for the wind turbines however, these issues can be easily adressed. end quote:


People consider all the costs for building , installing and maintaining a wind farm, yet when compaired to coal or nuke plants, the mining costs and damage is never considered.
There are windmills all over this country that are making clean power every day and night.

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_States[/ame]


----------



## MERGANZER

Just say yes to the Michigan wind farms!!!!!!!! Jobs, energy independence and jobs. Bring it on 

Ganzer


----------



## kingfisher 11

If the decision is made to build the windmill farms. I have a solution to the lack of wind. Just pay me to fish in the area every day. I can assure you the wind will blow. It seems like when ever I want to fish the wind really kicks up. :lol:


----------



## multibeard

MERGANZER said:


> Just say yes to the Michigan wind farms!!!!!!!! Jobs, energy independence and jobs. Bring it on
> 
> Ganzer


They would just be another tourist draw. Just like the Silver LAKE Sand Dunes they will be off shore of.


----------



## 1mainiac

It is now easy to see how Bernie Maddof got away with what he did for so long there are lots of gulible people. Add in the one uneffected and those who have no opinion and there you go ding ding ding a winner every time. This is the mindset that got us to where we are, not those of us who question and even challenge the answers. When enough people buy the fairy tale it is now the truth. Is wind power possible yep it sure is but take our tax dollars out of the equation make private companies do it without government funding and this will all go away because they all know with out free government money it won't work and none of them will get rich. Those who want this are ok with higher debt higher taxes and higher utility bills make private companies do it with their own money and all we get is higher utility bills. The problem is they can't do it without public funding because no one but the government is dumb enough to fianance them. We can convert most of our coal plants to Natural gas and have a cleaner enviroment and have on demand power for a couple hundred years while we work out the details on solar wind and other options. We can convert most of our cars and trucks to natural gas and do the same. The problem with wind is to run our homes and business's we need dependable power and every knows you can't count on the weather. The problem with solar is a way to store the power for when we need it because most want lights and heat at night when it is cold and dark. I know several people who live off the grid and survive just fine but I doubt many of you want to live as they do. Where 50% of your life is spent maintaining your home and resources. As for me I could live off the land but I am happy with most of my life I just want my kids and grandkids to have some of the same great times and life we have had and sticking them with a ton of debt and taxes does not sound like a good start for them.


----------



## Nailer

FLAT RATE said:


> Why are WE the Michigan Tax payers paying for any of the studies for some on else and providing any grants, the last I knew we were having a problem paying for our kids education in public schools and everyone has seen a cut


The next time you pay your electric bill, read the fee's. There's a renewable energy fee. It's in the $3 range for most households. Genny put that on there. It was put on there when she mandated that %10 of our energy come from renewable sources. Most likely that's where the money is coming from.


----------



## fathom this

1mainiac said:


> It is now easy to see how Bernie Maddof got away with what he did for so long there are lots of gulible people. Add in the one uneffected and those who have no opinion and there you go ding ding ding a winner every time. This is the mindset that got us to where we are, not those of us who question and even challenge the answers. When enough people buy the fairy tale it is now the truth. Is wind power possible yep it sure is but take our tax dollars out of the equation make private companies do it without government funding and this will all go away because they all know with out free government money it won't work and none of them will get rich. Those who want this are ok with higher debt higher taxes and higher utility bills make private companies do it with their own money and all we get is higher utility bills. The problem is they can't do it without public funding because no one but the government is dumb enough to fianance them. We can convert most of our coal plants to Natural gas and have a cleaner enviroment and have on demand power for a couple hundred years while we work out the details on solar wind and other options. We can convert most of our cars and trucks to natural gas and do the same. The problem with wind is to run our homes and business's we need dependable power and every knows you can't count on the weather. The problem with solar is a way to store the power for when we need it because most want lights and heat at night when it is cold and dark. I know several people who live off the grid and survive just fine but I doubt many of you want to live as they do. Where 50% of your life is spent maintaining your home and resources. As for me I could live off the land but I am happy with most of my life I just want my kids and grandkids to have some of the same great times and life we have had and sticking them with a ton of debt and taxes does not sound like a good start for them.


Well said 1mainiac!!!!!!! if people want to get off the grid by building their own windmill or solar panel let them do it. I know the windmill and solar panels all over town will be an EYE SORE but who cares. No one seems to care about the view over the lake.


----------



## Silver Panner

Really Spanky.... Your citing Wikipedia? Cause we all know Wiki is the be all end all when it comes to information these days :lol:

FLAT RATE hit the nail on the head. If these cannot be self sustaining then they are not worth the investment of time, money and natural resources

"Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want on any subject. So you know your getting the best possible information." - Michael Scott :lol:


----------



## RoadKillCafe

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...nuclear-reactors/?fbid=6Py00NX7Ew1#more-90402

This is what I would prefer instead of the coal plant going up in Rogers City.



> *Washington (CNN)* - President Barack Obama is set to announce $8.3 billion in loan guarantees Tuesday for two nuclear reactors to be built in Burke County, Georgia, White House officials have told CNN.
> The new reactors would be part of an expansion of an existing nuclear facility near Augusta, Georgia operated by Atlanta-based Southern Company. According to its Web site, Southern Company provides power to roughly 4.4 million customers in the Southeast.
> The loan guarantees will help create 3,500 on-site construction jobs and 850 permanent operations jobs, the administration officials claimed. The reactors will help provide power to over 550,000 homes and 1.4 million people, they said.


----------



## Hoosier Daddy

Just my two nickels.

1. Dead Birds from windmills: We have a couple near by in Bowling Green and you should see the giant pile of dead birds underneath these things:lol:. Seriously though what about all of the dead critters from coal energy production? Habitat loss from mining/dead juvinile fish is turbines ect.... Dead birds seems like a petty issue to me.


2. Ruining my view: I fish Western Basin of Lake Erie and have Davis Besse (nuke plant) to the east. Toledo Edison (coal fired) to the south. Detroit Edison (coal fired) to the west and Enrico Fermi (nuke) to the west. What about my view? The large billowing clouds of haze coming out of the coal fired and the huge plumes of steam coming out of the nukes do not add to my experiance one bit. I would take windmills over these anyday. Are windmills really that ugly?

Environmental issues: Nukes are so safe? Why not ask the folks that lived around Chernobyl? That area is uninhabitable. Even the worst possible scenario with wind power pales in comparison. What are we going to do with all the waste? Still no plan for that as far as I know. Capturing the wind/sun/wave/geothermal ect.. energy is the future. How long it will take is up for debate, but we would have to be ignorant to ignore the plentiful renewable energy sources that surround us in favor of finite resources that have real negative effects on the natural world. There is no denying that fossil fuels have many negative environmental impacts from cradle to grave. They are dirty to acquire and dirty to convert to usable energy. Nuke power has much promise, but is not COMPLETELY safe as many would have you belive.

4. Energy independence: For those beating their chest about economics and our grandchildrens future. What about the huge amount of US money that goes to countries that clearly do not have our interests in mind that provide our fossil fuels? What better gift to leave future generations of Americans than renewable sources of energy that we can create domestically? How much money would be saved directly? How about indirectly from having to police the world so the fossil fuel pipelines can stay open? While I agree we cannot just simply write a blank check and must invest wisely there is plenty of money being spent much less effectively in my mind.

Are windmills going to solve energy issues tomorrow? Most certainly they will not. Will they be a part of our countries energy mix for the future? I would bet yes.


----------



## salmon_slayer06

I say yes. I was hoping they would do this a while ago. Theres going to be more pros than cons with this one. Jobs for the state and less pollution.


----------



## fathom this

Salmon. What are the pro's? I did some digging and found numbers on wind generators versus the Ludington pumped storage plant.

First the pumped storage plant puts out 1,872 megawatts at peak.
During peak periods electrical generation can begin in two minutes
and reach peak output 1.8 million watts in 30 minutes. The pumped storage plant has only six turbines.

Wind generators such as the Siemens wind turbine SWT-3.6-107 suitable for offshore and on shore applications produce 3,600 Killawatts of power at peak. We all know how erratic the wind can be on the lake.
My math has never been good but If calculated right we would need 500 wind turbines to equal the output of just one Ludington pumped storage plant. We also need to take into account the interruption to the invironment during the years of construction and service.

I would like the fishermen and pleasure boaters to think about how they are going to access the area encompassed by the generating farm.Today security is very tight because of terrorist attack. Try and access any of the other generating plants without permission and a guide. In order to make these towers not visible to people on shore they would need to be many miles out and in more than 300 feet of water.

The pumped storage plant put Michigan workers to work for four years to construct the plant at a cost of $ 315 million. Todays cost would be even greater and a similar project would put many Michigan workers on the payrolls. The pumped storage facility also pays aprox.
10 million dollars in property taxes annually to local governments. The storage plant is also very low impact to the environment.


----------



## 1mainiac

Fathom This thanks that is one of my many points as to why I don't like this idea. I really like the idea of wind power and solar however neither are reliable to power us into the next generation. And other than putting a happy face on it the cost verses benifits is not there. Secondly we are going to pass the bill on to our Kids and in my opinion we have alreaedy stuck our kids and grandkids with enough bad paper to last thru their lifetimes. Do we need to work on our enviroment ABSOLUTELY do I support the idea 100% percent however will I support every idea presented no matter the cost NO. How many of you can look at your kids and grandkids and tell them I know you want to help us out so you won't mind that I just signed a deferred mortgage on the house and you start making payments on it when you turn 18 however it acrues interest from day one? So far pretty much every thing I have seen sounds great except for who gets the bill. Everyone talks about Government subsidies but the Government has no money so where does it come from they borrow angainst our kids futures and tax the crap out of everything in our lives. Only deadbeats and government employees profit from this in the long run. When we say only Michigan companies hiring local people can do these projects and are honest in how poorly the wind systems preform on average I will be more supportive. If Milwaulkee or Chicago want more power then lets build a plant or 2 and sell them the power at a profit. We have the resourses we have the people and we don't need a bunch of windmills promoted by windbags to do it. We could easily build several pump stations like Ludington and perhaps a nuke or 2 combined with converting our coal plants to natural gas and have more jobs and more power than any state our size would need. This could be done without doubleing or tripleing our electric bills and would make all of our power sources pretty much green in the process. And ask any fisherman about the warm water discharges as a place to fish.


----------



## kmauntler

1maniac and fathom this are right on. Nobody from Michigan would recieve monetary benfits from a windmill project, just the government. The windmill company sets up the mills, sell the energy to an energy provider and the state collects taxes and any other royalties agreed to in their contract. 
The jobs created would be minimal. There are a few "plants" that make some of the parts for the mills, but only a small percentage of each mill would come from Michigan, or even the U.S.
Access to the area with the windmills would probably be shut down or very heavily guarded. That's "their" equipment out there...The state, well, will do what it feels needs to be done...Civilians probably wouldn't be getting w/in 300 yds of the "farm".

I am only basing these opinions on a meeting I just attended with Duke Energy for our area. The Lake Michigan project was mentioned and briefly discussed also.

I agree that going green is nice, but as my dad mentioned, "If it was such a good deal, why aren't there mills on all the state properties?" I'm with 1maniac, there are better ways...

Just my nickel,
Ben

1maniac, love the "city" analogies, too bad everyone can't see through the "fog" to who really is benefitting from our current regime's actions and where our country is headed. Sad.


----------



## 1mainiac

Here is some more reading on the subject of wind power http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/wind_energys_ghosts_1.html

My younger brother went to the Jordan energy institute 20 years ago I have read every one of his study guides. Lots of cool stuff in those books but barely any that is cost effective or allows for what we consider normal life now. The bottom line is People like Al Gore will tell you that you have to make sacrifices and learn to live a more green life while they live in a house that uses as much power as some of the entire villages we live in and fly everywhere in a private jet all the time making millions off us. You want to fix our problems take 1/2 of all polititions Federal state and local and hang them tell the other half they have 90 days to fix it or their next. The other problem is that we have 10's of millions of people who are unable or unwilling to survive without government handouts. Many have no idea what the differance is between need and want. Personally I want someone to pay all my bills so I can just kick back and enjoy life. Sadly I was raised by people who worked for a living and were proud so instead of riding in the wagon my job is to pull the damn thing till I die. I wrote a analigy a while back about how our ancesters thought and worked compared to today and the progression that got us here. But in the end Hank said it best a country boy can survive sorry for those in the city but if it all goes bad may God have mercy on you.


----------



## Stinky

"The other problem is that we have 10's of millions of people who are unable or unwilling to survive without government handouts. Many have no idea what the differance is between need and want. "


gimmie gimmie gimmie, thnk for me I cant think for my self gimme gimme gimme just like my twenty year old cat.


----------



## Buddwiser

Silver Panner said:


> In the pics provided at the town forum you sure can see them. I still dont see why anyone is in favor of expensive and ineffecient energy.



Where on the great lakes are these located.......can you say photoshop.


----------



## 1mainiac

Buddwiser said:


> Where on the great lakes are these located.......can you say photoshop.


Does it matter the simple fact is you can see several miles out on the lake on any given day. With a set of binoculars I can see the girls on the beach from 6 or 7 miles out do you really think row after row of 200ft towers is not going to be seen? http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm
is a caculator to determine distance to the horizon according to it a 200ft tall tower will be visable for 17.3 miles if you were standing at water level. Add more if you are elevated as well the idea that moving them a couple miles will make them dissappear is BS.


----------



## Nailer

Buddwiser said:


> Where on the great lakes are these located.......can you say photoshop.


The company that want's to put them out there composed (photoshoped(not really a word)) these shots, so every one would know what they would look like.


----------



## Flyfisher

I don't have much of an issue with them as long as they are 100% funded by PRIVATE money and placed well offshore, say 5+ miles. As mentioned earlier, they could artificially create habitat and I believe that it would be important for anglers to have access to these areas if, indeed, they became fish magnets.

NIMBY seems to be the biggest issue right now and the company Skandia seems to be trying to work out the issues on a local level. I wil reiterate that if Skandia is going to profit from government "kickbacks" funded by taxpayer money, I would be opposed. 

In my opinion, this will not end up happening as the opposition is relatively strong already.


----------



## diztortion

Why don't they start to generate power off of all the dams that are in the rivers..? They build them and half of them aren't setup for creating spark.


----------



## 1mainiac

diztortion said:


> Why don't they start to generate power off of all the dams that are in the rivers..? They build them and half of them aren't setup for creating spark.


Very true many are setup for flood control only but could easily produce power as well.


----------



## mattm

http://http://www.detnews.com/artic...developer-proposes-$4B-plan-for-West-Michigan

http://www.detnews.com/article/2010...developer-proposes-$4B-plan-for-West-Michigan


----------



## mattm

The great lakes have always taken a back seat to industry and development and probably will again here. 

Even though they may not be pretty as long as the windfarms dont spew toxic sludge into the lake or transport water to the southwest states Im fine with it.


----------



## fathom this

mattm said:


> The great lakes have always taken a back seat to industry and development and probably will again here.
> 
> Even though they may not be pretty as long as the windfarms dont spew toxic sludge into the lake or transport water to the southwest states Im fine with it.


 Herein lies the beef! If we let the government install these wind generators they will gain more control over the great lakes water. If people think the government will allow fishing in and arround the "wind farm" they are sadly mistaken. Just try and gain entrance to any other generating facility. With increased control over the water they will pass legislation to siphon water off to be used by other states. This could be the biggest reason they will not close the Chicago sanitary canal. They already have their foot in the door. As far as spewing toxic sludge into the water, these things will cause polution by just constructing them and then there is the problem of dismanteling them when they are obsolete. No one will profit from wind farms in the great lakes except the out of state/country manufacturers. A very large no of generators will need to be installed to produce the power of just one of our land based plants.


----------



## Rodz

I'm in favor of it. Lots of jobs and I can't see where it will cause any damage. It sure can't look as bad as all the power poles and lines on every street. If it doesn't work, they can be removed with no sign of them ever being there. I think they look just fine.


----------



## 1mainiac

Rodz said:


> I'm in favor of it. Lots of jobs and I can't see where it will cause any damage. It sure can't look as bad as all the power poles and lines on every street. If it doesn't work, they can be removed with no sign of them ever being there. I think they look just fine.


Name one place this has been done where after it failed they cleaned it up like it never happened. This attitude is why our country is going down the drain. Between stupidity and indeferance we don't stand a chance. Go to CA and look at all the failed rusting rotten wind farms in some of the formally most beautiful canyons there are thousands of pics of these on the internet. So if the fruit and nut belt has given up on them how well do you really think they work.


----------



## fathom this

1mainiac said:


> Name one place this has been done where after it failed they cleaned it up like it never happened. This attitude is why our country is going down the drain. Between stupidity and indeferance we don't stand a chance. Go to CA and look at all the failed rusting rotten wind farms in some of the formally most beautiful canyons there are thousands of pics of these on the internet. So if the fruit and nut belt has given up on them how well do you really think they work.


Maniac is right on and I would also add that we could see a 30 % increase in our energy bills to pay for this so called green energy.


----------



## Stinky

As much as some would like to think this is the beat al to end all, I am sure many of the people that really matter are not reading this forum. Unless you follow through and

Write your congressman and women and tell them what you think. Tell that stupid govenor she is history while your at it.

After seeing the unused ones out west it really make you wonder how effective they really would be. I agree start getting all these dams that are currently in place producing power, they ruined the rivers with them may as well get them giving back. I know there are at least 8 on the Ausable river. Instead of spending money on the wind farms put the workers to work improving / updateing and converting all dams in the state to hydroeclectric dams. 

GL all the water is finally getting soft down here. Sorry about the typo in the subject here.


----------



## DANIEL MARK ZAPOLSKI

ESOX said:


> Having fished the offshore oil rigs in the gulf, all I can say is bring it on. Talk about artificial structure and fish magnets..


BINGO! 
as for taking sunset pictures without the windmills in them just turn 90* and snap the flicker. so you think windmills will decimate the lake:lol: wait till you get those 100lb jumping carps then you have a something to b**** about.


----------



## 1mainiac

DANIEL MARK ZAPOLSKI said:


> BINGO!
> as for taking sunset pictures without the windmills in them just turn 90* and snap the flicker. so you think windmills will decimate the lake:lol: wait till you get those 100lb jumping carps then you have a something to b**** about.


Brillant just move the sun 90* and all will be fixed and it is not so much about them ruining the lake as it is about idiots spending my grandkids money on stupid ideas. I will bet not one of these wind projects has produced the energy it to build them and if they were so great a money maker someone besides the stupid government would fianance them. It's all easy and great as long as you invest some one elses money in it.


----------



## Spanky

just in.................


Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 11:48 AM
Subject: Fw: Fwd:Fishing around wind turbines


FYI,



Fishing OK near planned wind farms off New Jersey coast By RICHARD DEGENER Staff Writer, 609-463-6711 | Posted: Tuesday, September 8, 2009 

|







Photo by: Press graphic 

The three companies planning to construct wind farms off the New Jersey coast have agreed to not pursue any restrictions on fishing near the operations, which means commercial fisherman would be allowed to harvest their bounty between the turbines while anglers, pot fishermen and even scuba divers could fish right next to the structures.

Government agencies involved with granting permits for the windmills would still have to agree to the proposal, but they are not expected to mount objections.

There is even some discussion of installing buoys near the turbines so fishermen can tie up and not have to anchor in deep water.

The firms Fishermen's Energy of New Jersey, Bluewater Wind New Jersey Energy and Garden State Offshore Energy already have leased areas from the U.S. Department of Interior to install meteorological towers to gather data to see whether wind farms are feasible.

The areas in question are each 10 square miles, which could have taken 30 square miles away from the fishing community. A fourth wind farm of 10 square miles is planned off Delaware that is also on grounds used by New Jersey boats.

The decision not to make areas around the windmills off-limits could have set a precedent for other wind farms. New Jersey is set to become the first state with offshore wind farms, but many other states are in the discussion or planning stages.

The state Board of Public Utilities, which is helping the projects with grants, is supporting open fishing zones. But since the projects are all in federal waters, the Department of Interior still must concur.

"I have some good news. None of the three companies are planning restrictions. There have been no collisions with wind farms in Europe and I'm sure our captains are just as good," Lance R. Miller, the BPU's chief of policy and planning, announced at Thursday's state Marine Fisheries Council meeting in Galloway Township.

Miller noted the wind farms may act like artificial reefs and attract fish, which would help hook-and-line anglers, pot fishers and scuba divers. He noted some types of commercial fishing could be physically restricted, only because of the distance between the turbines.

There is a plan to submerge the transmission lines that carry the electricity the turbines produce so they will not affect commercial fisheries that use dredges, such as clammers, to work the ocean floor.

"The electricity doesn't go to shore by magic," Miller said.

The commercial fishing industry, which has had problems over the years with transatlantic phone lines, is lobbying to make sure they are buried deep enough.

Miller noted the tips of the spinning blades will be about 100 feet from the water, so they will present no problems for boats.

The Department of Interior's Minerals Management Service could still impose restrictions but this would likely be addressed when the process gets further along. At this point, the leases are just for meteorological stations.

Rhonda Jackson, a spokeswoman for Fishermen's Energy, said the U.S. Coast Guard has no restrictions on fishing near offshore structures. The Minerals Management Service has sometimes put a 90-foot buffer to oil rigs but Miller said he does not foresee this with turbines.

Miller said the turbines are private property so fishermen may not be allowed to tie up to them to fish.

Jackson, however, said a buoy system has been discussed just to solve that problem.

"It depends on how the foundations are built. We'll talk about that during the design phase," Jackson said.

Miller said having Fishermen's Energy, which comprises commercial fishing interests, involved is helping meet the needs of the industry. Jackson said one reason the firm formed was to make sure the farms were located away from prime fishing grounds.

It has not yet been determined how many turbines the companies hope to build. It depends partly on how many megawatts of electricity each one produces. A 350-megawatt wind farm, which is what Fishermen's Energy wants, would take about 97 turbines if each produced 3.6 megawatts. The state's Energy Master Plan calls for generating 1,000 megawatts offshore by 2012 and 3,000 by 2020, enough power for 350,000 homes.

Miller said even if the turbines are a half-mile apart, it could impose physical restrictions on some types of fishing, including one where two boats tow a net between them.

"Something one mile wide won't get through a half-mile opening. If it fits, there would not be any restrictions," Miller said.


----------



## fathom this

Spanky said:


> just in.................
> 
> 
> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 11:48 AM
> Subject: Fw: Fwd:Fishing around wind turbines
> 
> 
> FYI,
> 
> 
> 
> Fishing OK near planned wind farms off New Jersey coast By RICHARD DEGENER Staff Writer, 609-463-6711 | Posted: Tuesday, September 8, 2009
> 
> |
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photo by: Press graphic
> 
> The three companies planning to construct wind farms off the New Jersey coast have agreed to not pursue any restrictions on fishing near the operations, which means commercial fisherman would be allowed to harvest their bounty between the turbines while anglers, pot fishermen and even scuba divers could fish right next to the structures.
> 
> Government agencies involved with granting permits for the windmills would still have to agree to the proposal, but they are not expected to mount objections.
> 
> 
> The areas in question are each 10 square miles, which could have taken 30 square miles away from the fishing community. A fourth wind farm of 10 square miles is planned off Delaware that is also on grounds used by New Jersey boats.
> 
> 
> The state Board of Public Utilities, which is helping the projects with grants, is supporting open fishing zones. But since the projects are all in federal waters, the Department of Interior still must concur.
> 
> 
> The Department of Interior's Minerals Management Service could still impose restrictions but this would likely be addressed when the process gets further along. At this point, the leases are just for meteorological stations.
> 
> 
> Miller said the turbines are private property so fishermen may not be allowed to tie up to them to them.
> 
> "It depends on how the foundations are built. We'll talk about that during the design phase," Jackson said.
> 
> 
> It has not yet been determined how many turbines the companies hope to build. It depends partly on how many megawatts of electricity each one produces. A 350-megawatt wind farm, which is what Fishermen's Energy wants, would take about 97 turbines if each produced 3.6 megawatts. The state's Energy Master Plan calls for generating 1,000 megawatts offshore by 2012 and 3,000 by 2020, enough power for 350,000 homes.


They tell you that you will be able to fish and boat around the turbines now but what happens if we have another terrorist threat. Government agencies are fully involved in these projects and we all know that they always stick to their word.

It takes a wind farm of 30 square miles to produce 350 megawatts of power with 97 turbines. The Ludington pumped storage plant produces 312 megawatts per each of its six turbines and it does so on less than three square miles of land which keeps no one from shiping freight, fishing or watching the sun set. To produce the same amount of electricity as the pumped storage plant we would need over 500 turbines taking up 180 sqare miles of our precious lake surface.

The Department of Interiors Mineral Management Service could still impose restrictions but these would be addressed later on. Wow does this sound like The Health Care Debacle?

Lets do ourselves a favor and build another pumped storage plant, it does not pollute or cost anywhere near what these wind turbines would.
We would not have to pay any green tax to build one.


----------



## 1mainiac

466 that is the number of megawatts the 1100 megawatt system in Ontario is producing right now. It has never acheived 95% capacity that I can find on any of the published reports going back to 2006 when the project went on line. It was not 1100 mega watts when it went online however it has never made 95% of CAPACITY no matter what size it was at the time. Here is the Mar 16th hour by hour output for the system.


DATE Time MWH
16-Mar-10	1	162
16-Mar-10	2	164
16-Mar-10	3	119
16-Mar-10	4	81
16-Mar-10	5	75
16-Mar-10	6	79
16-Mar-10	7	99
16-Mar-10	8	81
16-Mar-10	9	33
16-Mar-10	10	10
16-Mar-10	11	5
16-Mar-10	12	8
16-Mar-10	13	14
16-Mar-10	14	28
16-Mar-10	15	31
16-Mar-10	16	28
16-Mar-10	17	42
16-Mar-10	18	53
16-Mar-10	19	60
16-Mar-10	20	65
16-Mar-10	21	86
16-Mar-10	22	90
16-Mar-10	23	66
16-Mar-10	24	60

I am not making this up this is their published reports. For this crap they intend to more than triple the cost of electricity for the entire region. But wait we can't screw up our country fast enough to please some. I think I need to check with a friend of mine as to how fishing is in Idaho since they are passing a ammendment making ObamaCare illegal in their state. I also seen a report that 36 states are working on or considering similar legislation.


----------

