So far, I have processed requests including Charlestown RI, Lunenburg MA, Leominster MA, Sutton MA, Rutland MA, and my home town of Hudson MA. (Strange that most of my request have come from the Worcester area and I have not heard anything from the coastal towns of MA where the wind is great.)
Installing a Wind Turbine:
It is not an overly difficult task. If you use a monopole tower, you need to pour one concrete footing with rebar but your height is limited. If you want or need (because of wind conditions) to go above 10 meters, you will likely have to consider a guyed tower. That means five concrete footings. One for the tower, and four for the guy wire anchors. Both types of towers are designed to “tip up” with the help of a winch or a truck; No crane is necessary. Of course there is also electrical hookups, and grounding issues etc. but all is quite basic (things get a bit more complicated if you add batteries to your system).
As I have evaluated the various sites, here is what I’ve learned:
In two of the six towns small wind turbines are not allowed because of zoning. The zoning law is virtually identical in both towns and written (roughly).
If your specific use is not explicitly allowed (in the land usage table) then it is not allowed.
And since these land-usage tables were developed years ago, small wind turbines were not on any body’s mind. (a land usage table is a list of acceptable uses for land of different zoning)
In one of the six towns, the requirements applied to small wind turbines are the same as those applied to a utility installing towers for high-voltage lines – including anchoring a helium weather balloon during the special permitting process, and a 1.5x tower height setback requirement (meaning that a 100 foot tower must be at least 150 feet from any property line).
In another town, the “only” requirement is a “set-back” from the property line rule. The rule is based on a study of the distance a wind turbine blade will fly. The study was done in 1979! (the year I graduated high school) But a 12 foot rotor must be 200 feet from any property line.
In one town, there appears to be no restrictions other than a “special permit.” You know the kind. It’s when the neighbors get to weigh in on the request.
In one town, there appears to be no restrictions (not even a special permit). None-the-less, my customer is talking to his neighbors just in case.
I knew what I was getting into when I started this business so I’m not complaining I’m just pointing out the challenges we will face as we attempt to address global climate change*.
Yet at the rate our climate is changing, these barriers must come down. If you are not worried about climate change, you should be.
I attended the Massachusetts Climate Action Network Global Warming Action Conference (MCAN) meeting on Sunday. About 400 people attended! One “interesting” factoid: at the rate our climate is changing, New England will be like South Carolina by the end of this century (or sooner). That’s a 12 degree increase in average temperature.
BTW, Wind is now far more cost effective than Solar – An investment of approximately $10,000 will pay back in 5 to 10 years. (To achieve the same output with a solar PV system, you would pay 2 to 3 times as much – doubling or tripling the payback period)
I (we) need to figure out how address these institutional barriers to wind turbines. Then almost anyone (who has land and $10K) can directly reduce greenhouse gasses.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Mark
Footnotes:
The turbine I am offering is a 1.8 kw unit. It will supplement a typical house but not replace all its power usage. This turbine is being installed all over the country on lots as small as 1/2 an acre (10 meter towers, one acre for 20+ meter towers). These turbines payback in 5-10 years (depending on usage, wind conditions, electricity rates, rebates, and tax incentives)
In a recent conversation with the planning and zoning director for my town I was told that a $20 million issue will draw a small crowd to town meeting but a one sentence change in the zoning laws will draw out the whole town. At first I thought she was exaggerating until I discussed zoning changes with other folks…(though I still think it’s a bit of an exaggeration)
Massachusetts is not unique. In some parts of Florida you cannot roof-mount solar panels for fear of hurricanes. This is really dumb. Because if the wind is strong enough to rip off a solar panel, it’s strong enough to rip off the roof (ok so I exaggerate a bit).
I (we) need to figure out how address these institutional barriers to wind turbines. Then almost anyone (who has land and $10K) can directly reduce greenhouse gasses.
<
p>
Almost anyone (who lives in tUSA) can directly reduce greenhouse gasses without land, $10,000, or wind. It’s not that I think wind turbines are bad, but your claim really does seem a bit silly. It’s not wrong, it’s just oddly formed.
<
p>
I live in a part of MA with far too much population density for this to be an issue — people simply don’t have enough land for a 150′ setback, so this is a non-issue in my parts. In general, I think power generation distribution is a good idea, but its not clear to me that fairly fast moving parts on a tower are so great an idea in a neighborhood. Frankly, I don’t trust contractors and homeowners enough to belive in every single one of them. I also wouldn’t count on them to control any noise issues.
<
p>
In short, I’m glad that there are tons of barriers to widespread adoption. It will force towns to slowly figure out what the appropriate location, size, and installation methods are for their town.
<
p>
In the mean time, switching to CF lighting, putting on a sweater in the winter, turning the thermostat 3 degrees in the less-energy-usage direction, and not driving if traveling less than 1 mile goes a long way in reducing consumption, and the total cost might be $100 for the bulbs, $50 for the sweater, $300 for a bicycle, and -$??? for the heat/AC/elec/gasoline savings.
that Conservation is first – the cheapest energy is the energy you don’t use…
<
p>
If you read my blog you’ll see a number of energy saving ideas.
<
p>
Unfortunately, global climate change is not going to go away on conservation alone. We must convert much our fossile fuel energy to clean sources…
<
p>
Small wind is only one of those sources.
<
p>
As to the 1.5x setback – you missed my point. I feel a 1.5x setback requirement is too much – it is unjustifiable even from an engineering standpoint. How can a 100 foot tower fall 150 feet?
<
p>
And look at light poles along the highway and in the Walmart parking lots or lighting our kids athletic fields. These range anywhere from 30 to 100 feet (some at the Mass Pike interchanges might actually be higher). The wind drag of the light fixtures far exceeds the wind drag of a small wind turbine yet we have those up all over the place… why the double standard?
<
p>
as to the tons of barriers and slow response – we are out of time. And if you belive otherwise, I afraid you’ve bought the oil and coal companies’ disinformation propaganda (I hope you have not but with all their money they have made quit a compelling “argument” against global climate change.
<
p>
Mark
<
p>
FYI
<
p>
I just purchased a “Kill-a-watt” device. It measure usage at the wall.
<
p>
My son hooked it up to his computer powerstrip.
<
p>
With everthing running (printer,scanner, 19″ tube monitor etc.) his system draws 120 watts. Turn off the monitor and it drops to 60. Turn “off” everything else and it still draws 15 watts (all those little bricks sucking power)
First, know that, generally speaking, we’re on the same side. I’d rather hash it out here so that both of our understanding (and arguments) are stronger. So, please don’t become frustrated with me (not that you seem to have become frustrated yet…)
<
p>
that Conservation is first – the cheapest energy is the energy you don’t use…
<
p>
Indeed — which is why the claim I highlighted seemed so silly to me.
<
p>
Unfortunately, global climate change is not going to go away on conservation alone. We must convert much our fossile fuel energy to clean sources…
<
p>
I agree that humans aren’t willing to conserve enough to make conversion the only approach.
<
p>
Small wind is only one of those sources.
<
p>
Indeed, and a small one at that.
<
p>
As to the 1.5x setback – you missed my point. I feel a 1.5x setback requirement is too much – it is unjustifiable even from an engineering standpoint. How can a 100 foot tower fall 150 feet?
<
p>
It can bounce. It can slide down a slight incline. A piece of it can break off on impact and get ‘thrown’ farther in that direction. The 100ft + x provides buffer for mis-measurement, pedestrians walking on the sidewalk just more than 100ft away, etc. Should x be 50 feet? I don’t know. It certainly should be strictly greater than 0 though.
<
p>
And look at light poles along the highway and in the Walmart parking lots or lighting our kids athletic fields. These range anywhere from 30 to 100 feet (some at the Mass Pike interchanges might actually be higher). The wind drag of the light fixtures far exceeds the wind drag of a small wind turbine yet we have those up all over the place… why the double standard?
<
p>
Frankly, and Bechtel-Parsons be damned, I trust a government agency that has installed many many thousands of identical items in a virtually identical manner far more than I trust small contractors doing residential work where each job is a bit different. I trust the government to over-engineer, and private contractors and homeowners to cut costs to the point of under-engineering. As for Wal*Mart? Liability is a much bigger concern for them then it is for the ‘average’ home owner. I think it’s a double standard that, tunnel ceiling tile collapse be damned, is justified in reality.
<
p>
as to the tons of barriers and slow response – we are out of time. And if you belive otherwise, I afraid you’ve bought the oil and coal companies’ disinformation propaganda (I hope you have not but with all their money they have made quit a compelling “argument” against global climate change.
<
p>
Small wind is such a small part of the overall solution that if you’re making the claim that we need 10m wind towers in homes as part of the solution, you’ve bought into some mity rich propaganda yourself. Even if there were zero zoning regulations, what do you think adoption of small turbine generation would be on personal property over the next 10 years? 1%? 5%? I know climate change is happening, and I know that reducing man-generated carbon emissions will help mitigate that change. Every little bit helps, but this change in particular is many, many orders of magnitude on the side of irrelevance. It would take 280,000 1.5 kW personal wind turbines to create the generation capacity of the Cape Wind project — and that ignores the fact that the Cape Wind’s wind will blow at necessary speeds for generation far more often than nearly anywhere else in the state. So, I hope your business is successful and I hope people do start rolling out small wind generators — but do keep an engineer’s perspective on solutions, and recognize that small wind generation is way on the margins of the overall solution, and frankly, not necessary for a solution.
<
p>
I just purchased a “Kill-a-watt” device. It measure usage at the wall.
<
p>
I haven’t played with one, but I know all about ’em. I hope lots of folks start looking at ways to be electricity misers — as well as gasoline and heating fuel misers. In the mean time, I purchase 100% green energy, even though N*Star is my distributor and they don’t offer it. How? Cool Watts, at $2/200 kW (which is more than a month’s worth of electron juice for my household).
that we are on the same side. No problem no frustration.
<
p>
Yes small wind is a small part of the solution as is solar, as is big wind, as is tidal/wave, as is small hydro, biomass, etc.
<
p>
Is it necessary? None in the list is “necessary” (in its strictest interpretation) but each solution adds to the diversity and thus provides security (like mixing up your investment portfolio).
<
p>
Is there a compelling argument for one type of energy over another, are there down and upsides to each solution – sure.
<
p>
So we’ll have to let the market decide. Given the recent advances in small wind costs, I see the market deciding yes even with the barriers discussed above.
<
p>
And no surprises, there are barriers to all types of electical generation
<
p>
Nuclear – how long did Seabroook take? (and they never finished Unit 2)
Coal, oil, gas fired plants – probably easier than siting a small wind turbine đŸ˜‰ (sad to say the big utilities have lots of freedom – and our appetite for electricity makes it possible.)
Big Wind (like Cape Wind) – Must I even bring this up?
Small hydro – you can bet that environmentalists protecting waterways have a say in small hydro
Solar – cost is the biggest downside
Wave/Tidal – I can’t imagine the barriers now but I’m sure that they exist.
<
p>
No I disagree only on your point that small wind is irrelevant.
From American Wind Energy Association
<
p>
Thanks for the lively debate,
Mark
“small” (is 100kW really small? Your installations seem to be 1.8 kW at a time!) accounts for 45 MW. Out of an installed 10,500 MW (AWEA source), we’re talking about less than one half of one percent. Large wind has grown about 26% a year in tUS since 1998 (same source). If small wind grows 18-21%, it will continue to make up less than one half of one percent of wind power, which in 2002 made up approximately .55 exojoules of the 103 generated in tUSA. Since 2002 wind generated electricity has approximately doubled, and so assuming other generation has flat lined, we might be up to 1% in wind power. Since small wind makes up about one half of one percent of wind power, it makes up about 0.005% of the generated electricity in tUSA.
<
p>
So while you’ve got to start somewhere, and some progress is better than no progress, it seems to me that towns could do far better in terms of emissions if they thought about how their zoning laws encourage far more driving than would be taking place with smarter growth patterns, better public transit options, etc.
<
p>
And, to be honest, I worry about one bad small wind turbine apple spoiling the bunch. The electricity generated is such a negligible part of the solution, and the potential ill will is enough to really slow down the big projects, which have such a stronger impact.
<
p>
These turbines are great in rural areas, where people’s decisions on what they do on their land has such a tiny impact on their neighbors or their community. In more densely populated suburbs and city areas, turbines on acre lots worry me a bit.
BTW, Wind is now far more cost effective than Solar
<
p>
Between the two options, which gives a better power output? I’ve often heard people say that solar power is not reccomended in the NorthEast because of the cold. Well, it may be cold, but we still get sunlight…
goes to wind. You can, however, design a solar system that could power your house even here in new england. You’d need lots of panels and plenty of batteries. The payback is slow but you would get there eventually.
<
p>
Of course, as more people adopt the systems, they will (are) come down in price
Putting aside the issue of payback, would you say that (even in New England) Solar would win? There are factors greater than money: zoning, land, flexibility and ability to upgrade (it’s my understanding that with solar you could add panels or better batteries depending upon your setup)
<
p>
I think that a mixture of at least the two (where appropriate/available) is the best option, but I’m concerned about the nixing of solar power in this region. It almost seems like a built-in defeatest attitude on the part of most people, and I wonder how much of it started with the energy companies.
I would put in a solar system first. Much easier with regards to zoning – low maintenance (except for those darned batteries). The biggest issue with solar panels is Homeowners Associations
<
p>
A mix is great too. It is often windy when it is not sunny and often not windy when it is sunny so the two sources compliment each other…
<
p>
Mark
<
p>
No I’m not nixing solar just from an affordability standpoint, it’s easier to get started with wind…
<
p>
I have had a few requests by people with extra cash about solar in NE they want to do it because it is “the right thing to do” not for the payback
<
p>
There are three main motives for alternative energy
<
p>
Screw your utility (Anti-big brother đŸ™‚
Protect the enviroment (environmental return)
Economic Return
<
p>
but few people are motivated by just one of these…
First, understand that for nearly all people, they’ll still be “on grid” — meaning if the power goes out in the neighborhood, theirs goes off too, at least until they manually throw a breaker that removes their home from the grid. This is an important safety feature.
<
p>
At any rate, if you’re interested in ‘backup’, neither is very good. The power usually goes out when the sun isn’t shining much, and when the wind is too high for generation. So, ignore ‘backup’ generation for the sake of this discussion.
<
p>
Which is better? Well, keep in mind that the largest usage of electricity is when the sun is shining. The peak annual load moment is usually in the late afternoon on a really hot weekday in the summer. Why? Industry & offices, plus A/C. Why does this matter? Generally speaking, the ‘peak stations’ — the generators which only operate when the grid really needs it — pollute the most per kW generated. So, under this scenario, solar is clearly superior because it reduces the need for those really dirty peaking stations, which often run off of diesel fuel incidentally.
<
p>
However, per dollar invested, wind will generate more electricity in many places. So, is it better to reduce more little-pollutions, or fewer lots-pollutions? I don’t know. I’d say it doesn’t matter much, since if you do either you’re doing more than 99.9% of the homes out there.
<
p>
In the mean time, look to conserve. It’ll put more money in your pocket now (instead of 5-30 years from now), and it has an even stronger effect since saving 1 kW via conservation results in over 1kW not being generated, due to inefficiencies in transmission, etc.
Wow. Well, at least that will save on the heating bills….
<
p>
I started a little project with myself when I began to consider solar panels. How low can I get my KWH each month? I know everyone’s situation is different and it isn’t fair to race each other to the lowest KWH, but try it out. Pull out that electric bill and see if you can beat it next month.
I pay my kids the savings – helps motivate them…
easy/cheap ways include: * hanging your clothes to dry — even if only some of them in each washing cycle * checking the gasket on your fridge/freezer, and making sure the coils on the back are clean. While you’re at it, do you really need that extra college/regular sized fridge in your garage, basement, or bonus room? Consider getting rid of it! * investing in Great Stuff, and using it to fill gaps near doors, windows, around the outside of electrical boxes inside walls where insulation tends to be sparse, etc. * homemade draft guards — “worms” filled with clean scrap cloth at the base of drafty doors * wisely opening the curtains and/or windows to let in “good” temperature air * reducing your use of “vampire” electronics, ranging from the plugged in electronic alarm clock in the guest room to the newer TVs and other electronics that suck electricity 24/7/365, on or off. * compact fluorescent bulbs * motion sensor outdoor lights * water heater insulation blanket * “Saran wrap”ing your windows in the winter * put on a sweater
<
p>
More expensive/difficult ways include: * planting trees around your house wisely — a deciduous tree on a more southern side of your house will block the sun in the summer (lowering AC needs) and let the sun in but block a bit of wind in the winter (reducing heat needs). Landscaping can make a sizable difference. * radiant heat flooring is expensive to install, but costs less to operate. * electronic thermostats help you not heat your home when you don’t need to * tank-less water heaters, where available, are a great energy saver * replace your old, hard to maintain single pane glass windows, unless your local historic district board says you can’t. * evaluate the insulation in your attic to determine if it is sufficent * call 1-866-527-7283 to have NStar come by and give you a free energy audit. Google around if you don’t use NStar — many providers do this. * move to a smaller home. They tend to cost less to operate and maintain. Hey — I did say it was difficult! * solar cells? wind turbine? consider ’em all, and don’t forget the tax breaks!
on the clothesline and by turning the heat-dry cycle on my dishwasher. Air dry is good enough for ’em!
<
p>
One of the hardest things to do was untangle the passel of cords for the electronics around the TV. I got all the ones I could onto a surge protector.
<
p>
Spent the biggest money on double-pane replacement windows. Although the cost was high, I can easily turn down the thermostat now, and still feel more comfortable than I did when the draft was blowing.
<
p>
Biggest mistake: buying a tankless water heater before I had the plumber in. It was going to cost me thousands to get the venting, gas, etc all configured right. I decided there were bigger gains elsewhere so I have abandoned that idea.
in all towns are set up to grant variances and special permits. So get your paperwork together and apply for a permit and see what happens. You will get a hearing before the board with the abutting neighbors and other interested citizens, and lots of discussion. In my town, special permits have been granted for short wave radio towers – with similar concerns about “what is they come down?”
In my experience, zoning boards hear the needs for new regulation before the towns themselves. And once the zoning board has gone through some cases, the town’s planning staff, the town manager, etc., will come to understand the issues and may craft a bylaw change because they see that the town wants it. And the community will be talking about it back and forth before it comes to a town meeting.
Variances require hardship due to the land, the soil conditions, the siting of the house and other conditions that relate to the land, like where the septic system is. Special permits have to do with the ‘amenity of the neighborhood’. Both are legal documents that become part of a deed. This means you will have to do careful and creative thinking to present the inability to erect a wind turbine as a necessary and proper thing in terms of land. I think it can be done. And I think you should try.
Boy am I getting a lesson in zoning. I appreciate you sharing your understanding.
<
p>
Mark
First, I LOVE the idea. I agree that we should both conserve and produce renewable energy. No question about that, BUT:
<
p>
Most people in Massachusetts live in a either a densly populated area, or (even worse) in sprawling suburbs where homes are sprinkled such that there is no space left for projects like this. Worse, there seems not to be enough wind in most areas to warrant a turbine. Actually, solar panels seem to be a more viable option for most area’s of Massachusetts.
<
p>
I wish I could say you will succeed; but I fear that the above listed factors + NIMBY mentality will prevent widespread use wind energy to become a reality.