BUXTON, N.C.
Gov. Beverly Perdue, state Sen. Marc Basnight and state Rep. Tim Spear on Friday gave local residents their first opportunity to learn more about a proposal that would put up to three wind turbines in Pamlico Sound.
In a presentation to more than 250 people at Cape Hatteras Secondary School, the state leaders said the pilot project would give North Carolina the opportunity to lead the nation in wind energy production.
"The reality is we are polluting the Earth and we need not to do such," said Basnight, a Manteo Democrat.
The University of North Carolina is expected to sign a contract with Duke Energy Carolinas by Thursday to install one to three turbines seven to 10 miles from shore in the sound between Avon and Buxton.
Carolyn Elfland, the project manager, said no state money is involved in the pilot.
Duke is footing the bill, she said, because it views the project as research and development.
There is no set time frame for completion - which will involve permitting, designing and installing the turbines - but Elfland said the public will be kept in the loop.
Perdue said she is "bound and determined" to safely and aggressively pursue green power and make North Carolina "the home of innovation around the world."
Harvey Seim, a UNC-Chapel Hill marine sciences professor who worked on a wind energy feasibility study, said in the presentation that turbines would be able to be seen in the distance from the beach.
"They're likely still visible on a clear day," he said, "but they're certainly not hovering over your house."
Seim said the pilot project might lead to more wind energy production offshore in the ocean - which has the best wind class - or in the sound.
After the contract is signed, Seim said, a state task force will be created to work with Minerals Management Service, which oversees offshore lease units.
It is unclear what effect wind production could have on the potential production of oil or gas leases, he said.
The feasibility study, published last month, determined the Buxton site i s one of the best for utility-scale wind energy production in state waters. The project was one recommendation made in the report.
In comments after the presentation, some residents voiced suspicion of the government's motives, and others talked skeptically about global warming and the need for alternative energy.
Virginia Luizer of Frisco said it's a waste of money to invest in the project without the prior approval of certain permitting agencies, as well as having the backing of the community.
"Until you get a commitment from these people, you're putting the cart before the horse," she said.
But most of those who spoke were open to the proposal.
William Howard of Ocracoke said that in light of the potential impact of climate change on the barrier islands, a long-term solution that would be cheaper and more sustainable than offshore oil is needed.
"As a fundamental way of being, we must change," he said. "My family has been here for 300 years, and I'm looking at not even being able to be here anymore."
Catherine Kozak, (252) 441-1711, cate.kozak@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Jim here--Virginia Luizer's Husband
Well said, ridgekeeper. I agree. In fact, for the wind presentation to be objective, it should have begun with information pertaining to the comparative cost per kilowatt for coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, solar, and geothermal generated electricity. That this information was not provided suggests to me that the proponents of wind power are not being totally above board.
Fight the research idea of offshore wind
Once you open the door, you better watch who comes with them! Professors looking for "green" money in their pockets? Do you think the reasearch will not be biased?
In the mountains, we have had professors from Appalachian State pushing and lobbying for commercial wind plants in the mountains. They went as far as to create a "false" report and present it to the Climate Change Committee of this state. They were busted, but they have never come forward with where they got their results and information.
So watch out. These groups want our tax money and wind energy is MASSIVELY subsidized (with my money and your money) to the tune of $23.00 dollars per MWh. Coal is .8 pennies per MWh. Natural Gas is .44 pennies per MWh. Think our rates will not go up?
Please check wind watch or wind action web sites for more information.
Wind Energy is a scam whether offshore or onshore
Jack...you could be right as the FAA or the military will have to check the location of each turbine. The wind permitting wording of SB-1068 left out the FAA. Although a federal group, they should be involved right away.
But look at Denmark. After decades of trying wind energy, they now report it does not work. In fact they were here in the USA telling us now to put our eggs in the wind energy basket.
"Thomas J. Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research (IER) that commissioned the report, is unequivocal in his warning: "In the case of Denmark, you have a nation of 5.4 million, occupying some of the most wind-intense real estate in Europe — and it still doesn't even come close to the 20 percent threshold envisioned by President Obama for the United States. This may indeed be the model for the future — but only if you believe that a combination of smoke, mirrors, and prohibitively high utility rates are the key to our economic and environmental salvation."
Where will Duke get the money? Our rates will increase!
wined turbines
A nice presentation was given and most questions were answered but I am still not sold on the concept of wind due to the cost. But since this is a private venture and none of my tax money is being spent then I say go ahead. I doubt that it will be feasible to complete the project without subsidies and then I will scream. Some one needs to do a solar project and then we can put it all on the table and compare. Coal, oil, nuclear, wind, natural gas or solar. A whole city is being planned in Florida and the grid will be 100% solar. Since the market fell the actual construction of homes and business has been stalled but the solar grid has been given the OK to keep on constructing it. The name is Babcock Ranch. I will need to study it some more also. But that should be a nice model. Just to say we want to save the planet is not incentive enough. We all want to save the planet but we need to always look at the economics also
Your queries are easily
Your queries are easily answered if you research your questions Jack. A simple map or chart will answer your questions about the bombing range. Not that it matters as the highest wind turbines do not affect jet traffic. The biggest problem w/ that aspect of your questions is that you feel their is an alternative. Read up buddy.
UNC Authority
Where does UNC get the authority to sign a contract for the use of the sound waters for this??? Should not the state/county's be the agents having authority??? Is there going to be a leasing fee?? I think that wind energy is great but cannot see where UNC has the power to lease sound waters??? How about the Flight Paths for the Navy/Air Force ranges in Dare???.