lake st clair wind farm discussion

**edgar_rhode** · May-01-10, 07:14 PM

this should be good. i'll post some additional images / charts / diagrams later this evening.

Retroit · May-01-10, 07:42 PM

I was going to ask whether the ice floes would pose a problem, but it appears that this is already being looked in to.

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/.../freshwater-wind-farms-for-the-great-lakes/

**edgar_rhode** · May-01-10, 08:08 PM

i can't attribute this to any group. but here is one interpretation of what the canadian proposal for the wind farm would look like from the US side.

the first image seems grossely [[ sic ) alarmist. i can't find anything in the original proposal that comes anywhere near covering the entire canadian side of the lake with turbines.

images two and three seem similarly exaggerated. nothing in the canadian proposal suggests covering the entire horizon with turbines.

heres a link to a PDF from 02.10. to the proposal as it stood then:

http://southpointwind.com/files/Sout..._MW_DRAFT_.pdf

**edgar_rhode** · May-01-10, 08:19 PM

these details seem more in line with what is being suggested.

the first image describes 3 smaller farms decidedly on the southern shore of the lake closer to canada.

the second image is my crude overlay of what i believe the real plan is versus the alarmist plan.

the third image gives a better representation of the closest farm. yes at that distance it probably will be viewable from the pointes and lakeshore drive. but nowhere near as overwhelming as what was suggested in the CGI renderings.

in addition i've included a fourth image from [[ i believe ) the new york times to give some sense of distance and scale to what the height of the turbines might look like. i have no way of knowing if the turbines in the NYT image are the same height and size as what the canadians are proposing.

--

like i said in the initial post the meeting at the war memorial on monday evening should be interesting.

Retroit · May-01-10, 08:38 PM

Thank you for sharing your knowledge. I think it would be best if they started with a more modest undertaking. It would be more palatable to people. A single row of turbines is much more appealing than a huge conglomeration.

Also, I would think that the base of the turbine would have to be much more substantial than that depicted in Figure 1 of the report. Consider the concrete mass that is required for bridge footings to withstand the ice floes.

**Hermod** · May-01-10, 09:15 PM

Considering that our summer breezes tend to be steadily from the southwest, you would think that a location near the northeast corner of the lake would give the optimum wind sweep across the water. I guess the folks in Wallaceburg would be upset if they located it there.

**edgar_rhode** · May-01-10, 09:42 PM

actually there are wind pattern studies within the proposal PDF. i haven't read through the whole thing but it discusses at length some of the more obvious issues.

**Hermod** · May-01-10, 10:13 PM

Originally Posted by edgar_rhode

actually there are wind pattern studies within the proposal PDF. i haven't read through the whole thing but it discusses at length some of the more obvious issues.

Yes, I would locate a cluster a bit north of the Lighthouse Cove cluster.

**Mind field** · May-01-10, 10:57 PM

I really hope there isn't much opposition to this wind farm. I mean beyond just plain asthetics, which is really petty and selfish excuse to oppose wind power, there is no good reason for opposition. People must realize, and hopefully the recent tragedies in West Virginia and the Gulf of Mexico will awaken them to this realization, that we must move without delay towards a clean energy future, eliminating our reliance on destructive and polluting fossil fuels for good.

**Gistok** · May-02-10, 12:03 AM

Originally Posted by Mind field

I really hope there isn't much opposition to this wind farm. I mean beyond just plain asthetics, which is really petty and selfish excuse to oppose wind power, there is no good reason for opposition. People must realize, and hopefully the recent tragedies in West Virginia and the Gulf of Mexico will awaken them to this realization, that we must move without delay towards a clean energy future, eliminating our reliance on destructive and polluting fossil fuels for good.

I have to respectfully disagree.... there will likely be vehement opposition. I doubt that any of those Grosse Pointe waterfront millionaires are going to give a rats ass about the tragedies in either West Virginia and Gulf of Mexico, when it comes to their million dollar views.

First of all Lake St. Clair has to be one of the most pleasure craft intensive lakes on the planet. I'm sure there will be plenty of future tragedies when some pleasure crafts crash into the base of one of these turbines [[alcohol will likely be involved).

With nearly 100,000 square miles of great lakes water surface... why do they have to pick the smallest and busiest?

**Hermod** · May-02-10, 06:09 AM

Originally Posted by Gistok

I have to respectfully disagree.... there will likely be vehement opposition. I doubt that any of those Grosse Pointe waterfront millionaires are going to give a rats ass about the tragedies in either West Virginia and Gulf of Mexico, when it comes to their million dollar views.

First of all Lake St. Clair has to be one of the most pleasure craft intensive lakes on the planet. I'm sure there will be plenty of future tragedies when some pleasure crafts crash into the base of one of these turbines [[alcohol will likely be involved).

With nearly 100,000 square miles of great lakes water surface... why do they have to pick the smallest and busiest?

Lake St Clair is very shallow and is also very close to where the power will be used. Although the waves in Lake St Clair can be very steep and choppy, thye don't have as much destructive power as the waves on the larger lakes [[they don't have as much "travel" to build up force. Thus, designing.turbine structures for Lake St Clair is easier.

The classic liberal argument against wind farms is their effect on birds that fly into the rotating blades.

**sumas** · May-02-10, 06:32 AM

Dear Gistok, Thank you for using the phrase "Rats Ass" I rarely swear but when I do, I use that term. Any clue how it came into our vocabulary?

Wind mills are a serious part of Detroit history. Waiting for more info to see if this is currently the right thing to do.

**Jason** · May-02-10, 02:04 PM

Lighthouses are considered a good thing, even though they shoot out light and guide big noisy ships. They're utilitarian, but they have a lot of nostalgia attached to them.

I think windmills are the lighthouses of the future. Imagine a lazy summer afternoon on the lake, with the towers in the distance with the blades gently rotating as they have for as long as you can remember.

Also, I think it's nice that they're somewhat visible, so that people can see them and remember that we can be a progressive, forward thinking place.

And of course, the economic and environmental benefits go without saying.

**mwilbert** · May-02-10, 03:54 PM

Whether you think the project is appropriate or not, there is no doubt that before any such project is built there will be extensive review of the various environmental and safety issues--all you have to do is look at the nine years it took the Cape Wind project to get Federal approval, and the years of litigation expected even after the approval.

Personally, I like seeing wind turbines, but I can understand that some people don't.

**EastsideAl** · May-02-10, 05:52 PM

If what's happened in Massachusetts and Long Island is any indication, there will be a major freakout by wealthy waterfront landowners and boaters over this.

**Hermod** · May-02-10, 07:01 PM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

If what's happened in Massachusetts and Long Island is any indication, there will be a major freakout by wealthy waterfront landowners and boaters over this.

Yup, hire the right lawyer and he will have them tied up in environmental and safety studies for years.

Given it is the Canadians doing it on their end of the lake, possibly the ability to tie it up may be diminished. Canadian courts aren't afraid of Grosse Pointers like Massachusetts courts are afraid of the Kennedys.

**mwilbert** · May-02-10, 08:39 PM

Kennedys or no, very little of the Cape Wind action has been in Massachusetts courts--there were delays for a couple of state/local permits [[to run power cables back to the mainland) but as far as I can tell all the other delays have been at the federal level, which makes sense because the project is in US not state waters. There is one court case in Massachusetts regarding consolidated permitting that has been heard but not decided.

**CLAUDE G** · May-03-10, 03:00 AM

This is stupid!

If they are so worried about "Clean Energy" then why don't they build a few more Nuclear plants down river by Fermi II and close down the coal and gas powered plants.

I don't blame the rich people on LakeShore drive either in Grosse Pointe. I'll never be able to afford a home there, but if I did, I would not want to be eating my breakfast looking out my front window and see a ton of wind turbines.

I don't even want to see then when I drive down lakeshore drive or go out on my boat.

Best place to build these things are right in the city of Detroit on some of the thousands of acres of burned out neighborhoods. If the people who live down there complain, cut them a small check every month and the problem is solved!

lincoln8740 · May-03-10, 07:41 AM

Originally Posted by CLAUDE G

This is stupid!

If they are so worried about "Clean Energy" then why don't they build a few more Nuclear plants down river by Fermi II and close down the coal and gas powered plants.

I don't blame the rich people on LakeShore drive either in Grosse Pointe. I'll never be able to afford a home there, but if I did, I would not want to be eating my breakfast looking out my front window and see a ton of wind turbines.

I don't even want to see then when I drive down lakeshore drive or go out on my boat.

Best place to build these things are right in the city of Detroit on some of the thousands of acres of burned out neighborhoods. If the people who live down there complain, cut them a small check every month and the problem is solved!

Amen Claude

We can't stop what Canada does to their side of the water, they are a sovereign country and have the right to do whatever they want to do but there is no way this will fly in Michigan.

Thank god that the people that live on lakeshore are extremely powerful and that the lake is the property of the State of Michigan which means this will be a very localized issue and hence will never see the light of day

**bailey** · May-03-10, 09:16 AM

I have to respectfully disagree.... there will likely be vehement opposition. I doubt that any of those Grosse Pointe waterfront millionaires are going to give a rats ass about the tragedies in either West Virginia and Gulf of Mexico, when it comes to their million dollar views.

considering that most of the "grosse Pointe millionaires" that live on the lake have a road [[lakeshore) dividing them from the lake, I would think a few windmills on the horizon isn't going get anyone too fired up.

First of all Lake St. Clair has to be one of the most pleasure craft intensive lakes on the planet. I'm sure there will be plenty of future tragedies when some pleasure crafts crash into the base of one of these turbines [[alcohol will likely be involved)

while it is a lot. we fell out of the top ten years ago. Aside from that, you can't idiot proof boating. there are PLENTY of hazards already out there that people manage to kill themselves on every summer. from barges to shoals to channel markers to other boaters. no one is to blame but the moron that runs into them.

With nearly 100,000 square miles of great lakes water surface... why do they have to pick the smallest and busiest?

I would think it's proximity to population centers, the relatively mild weather [[compared with the big lakes) and it's shallow depth are the driving factors here. However, I believe there are proposals on lake Michigan as well.

Frankly, I don't know what the fuss is about. These things are all over the Thumb. Personally I think they are kind of cool looking. As long as they don't interfere with boating... in the form of placing huge swaths of the lake as restricted "no-go" areas or something, I say bring it on.

Retroit · May-03-10, 09:54 AM

I don't hear those Grosse Pointers complaining about those rusty old, pollution spewing lake freighters that pass by their breakfast nook every morning.

lincoln8740 · May-03-10, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Retroit

I don't hear those Grosse Pointers complaining about those rusty old, pollution spewing lake freighters that pass by their breakfast nook every morning.

Passing and stationary are two totally different things

I also love when people that don't live on the lake think its no big deal and don't understand what all the "fuss" is about.

Tell you what. here is a compromise-You cut my property taxes in half and you can build your windfarms anywhere you want.

sound good?

**bailey** · May-03-10, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by lincoln8740

Passing and stationary are two totally different things

I also love when people that don't live on the lake think its no big deal and don't understand what all the "fuss" is about.

Tell you what. here is a compromise-You cut my property taxes in half and you can build your windfarms anywhere you want.

sound good?

I live in Grosse Pointe Farms and keep my boat at pier park. How about you stfu?

lincoln8740 · May-03-10, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by bailey

I live in Grosse Pointe Farms and keep my boat at pier park. How about you stfu?

nice manners

I live in SCS on the water and pay a shitload of taxes and bought the house because of unobstructed views of the water

You should voice your opinion that you don't care about the views from your little boatwell.

It's excellent that you have a horse in this race because someone with a a boat well counts just as much as someone with a mansion in Grosse Pointe Farms/Shores

I swear to god they do

**bailey** · May-03-10, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by lincoln8740

nice manners

I live in SCS on the water and pay a shitload of taxes and bought the house because of unobstructed views of the water

You should voice your opinion that you don't care about the views from your little boatwell.

It's excellent that you have a horse in this race because someone with a a boat well counts just as much as someone with a mansion in Grosse Pointe Farms/Shores

I swear to god they do

why are you such a crank about this? seriously? How is your view obstructed by a windmill 5 miles away? you seem to think it's an affront to your person to have to see a windmill somewhere off on the horizon and you made a snide comment about those who don't live on the water shouldn't have an opinion. Are people NOT allowed to have differing opinions on this? I'm curious if you were just as indignant at the presence of the water towers that are clearly visible on the Canadian side from our side. Maybe you cant see them from your manse on SCS's gold coast? If you can, did you write your congressman when they put those up?

I merely returned your snideness in kind...and pointed out that I likely use the lake far more than you do from land [[thus do have an interest)...and you call me rude? Perhaps I shouldn't have stooped to your level of discourse, but I am not above a sardonic quip or two when poked.

Finally... I am voicing my opinion. I'm not objecting to what appears to be to me, nothing objectionable.