Last week I wondered what the motivation might be for Senate Bill 76, a measure that reduces the setback for most wind turbines on large wind farms from 500 feet to 1.1 times the tower height.
Last Thursday’s Senate Commerce and Energy Committee hearing revealed that this bill comes to us to fix an error committed by my neighbors at Dakota Plains Energy. As DPE lobbyist Doug Abraham and DPE chief Heath Johnson explained to the committee, when the Aberdeen-based wind developer built its Campbell County Wind Farm last year, DPE put seven of its fifty-five turbines closer than 500 feet to adjoining property lines. Now if the neighbors get cranky, Dakota Plains Energy has two options: take down the towers or change the law.
Lawyer Doug Abraham says, “Sometimes the legislative option is the only reasonable option….” Abraham told the committee the 500-foot setback is an arbitrary number. When the Legislature set that standard in 2009, the committee testimony offered no justification for that figure. The 1.1-times-height setback requirement is the scientific standard; Dakota Plains Energy, Abraham, and SB 76 sponsor Senator Brock Greenfield (R-2/Clark) contend that striking the 500-foot setback makes the law less arbitrary and simplifies code by applying the same standard to large wind farms that is currently applied to small, individual wind turbine installations. Senator David Novstrup (R-3/Aberdeen) agreed, saying that it “doesn’t make sense to make a company tear down things based on an arbitrary number” (ah, finally, Republicans want science over arbitrary whims!). Senator Novstrup moved passage, and the committee voted 6–0 to send the bill to the full Senate.
Break the law, get legislators to change the law, avoid consequences… as much as I like wind power, that doesn’t sound quite right to me. It certainly doesn’t sound right to David L. Ganje, who writes the following in a letter to that Sioux Falls paper:
The new bill removes the base 500-foot setback, allowing developers to bunch up turbines too close to a property line, and could lead to conflict with neighbors who have to put up with another party’s structures just over the property line. I am further concerned that this new law may be proposed in order to ‘fix’ several recently-placed towers in S.D. that are in violation of the current setback law; in other words, this bill appears to be an effort to retroactively fix a developer’s problem. This is not good lawmaking policy. The bill should not pass [David L. Ganje, letter to the editor, that Sioux Falls paper, 2016.01.31].
How close is too close? Winnie Peterson and her South Dakota anti-wind-power group “Wind Energy – Concerns About Rural Environment” (oh, you clever acronymalists!) want wind turbines set back a full mile from dwellings. Winnie Peterson and friends have raised heck in Lincoln County against DPE’s effort to build a wind farm in southeast South Dakota. Perhaps Peterson and friends will start doing some e-mail lobbying, complete with cool videos of wind turbines exploding:
Aw, come on: those turbine bits didn’t fly more than 500 feet, did they?
Related Reading: Wind power made up 47% of power generation capacity built in the U.S. in 2015. Natural gas made up 35%; solar power made up 14%.
Does changing the law after the installation is completed actually change the fact that the turbines were not installed according to regulations? No matter what the law gets changed to, the law that governs the in place turbines should be the laws that were in place when the permits for installation were originally applied for.
The developers should step up and admit they made a mistake and just purchase the additional land needed to make the installation legal. That would do more for the developers reputation then pushing for a change in the law.
does an 1868 deed to the Indians protect them when gold is discovered in 1874? No. Congress can do whatever the hell it wants. Closing the gate after…well you know.
vortex wind towers are safer. no huge blades.
Vortex—big wiggling magic wands stuck in the ground, no spinning parts? Their crowdfunding page has a good explanation of how it works. Interesting… although this MIT Technology Review article poses some good questions about efficiency and noise.
I’m with Scott on this issue. Do Constitutional prohibitions on ex post facto laws apply here?
And what does this say about the company that put up wind towers within the exclusion zone? Good grief these things cost millions, what ever happened to due diligence? The proper way to address this is to reach some sort of settlement with the neighboring land owner.
I’m convinced there is more to the story with the WE-CARE people as we are being led to believe. I’d love to see their entire list of funding sources because they are a bit too anti-wind to believe it is all for the love of some cows that might be expected to graze under a windfarm.
They claim they are not funded by any “outside interest” but what does that mean? If you have a traditional energy company operating in the area they aren’t an outside interest as they have a vested interest in the area correct? Needless to say there is money funding their campaign and I doubt it all comes from a few landowners who have donated a few bucks because they don’t like the appearance of some towers that might be 15 miles away from their property.
Concerns about shadow flicker or noise are valid… but not to the point we need one mile setbacks. I’d support a 1000 foot setback from habitable dwellings, but the 1.1 times the tower height setback seems appropriate in most cases because these wind farms are purposefully built in areas that aren’t surrounded by obstructions like buildings, trees, hills etc. Thus they don’t want to have close neighbors – they want the most wind possible.
The whole thing smells like NIMBYism. We are ok with digging up dozens of squares miles of coal in Wyoming and leaving massive pits behind while we transport that coal across the state and burn it in power plants. We are ok with the pollution generated and the impact to our health not to mention the issues with climate change… because we can’t see it from our own back door. But when someone wants a wind farm miles and miles away from the nearest town which will generate 100% renewable energy with zero emissions… suddenly we start caring?
Something doesn’t smell right here…. and it isn’t the CAFO that recieved full county approval with only a 1/4 mile setback.
ALEC and the koch bros are pretty well established in Pierre,are they not? Wind turbines here in my township have concrete bases at least 20 feet deep so one isn’t going to pick it up and move it. The original contract for the landowners stated that Mid-America would clean -up these bases and stuff when the turbines were no longer working. Guess what was eliminated from the new contract that farmers signed before these towers could be erected? Yup,farmers get to clean up Mid America’s messes.
I would want at least a 1000′ setback on any commercial turbine. These units are a fairly lightweight construction built with hollow sections (the ladder to the top is inside along with the wiring) and the top is a fiberglass unit housing a generator and control mechanisms for the blades.
The turbine must be shut down if the wind gets above a certain velocity because the blades have a maximum design RPM and the blade tips must not be allowed to go supersonic as the tip spins faster than the hub (crack the whip). They are controlled from a remote location that may be hundreds of miles away. A catastrophic failure produces spectacular results as seen in this clip. There have been reports of debris thrown 1/4 mile.
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/216920/
We have a much greater risk of disaster from a tractor trailer hauling a lot of 91 octate gasoline down the highway, or a freight train hauling four dozen cars worth of hydrochloric acid than we will ever have from a wind turbine…. yet we don’t have 1000′ setback requirements from highways or railroads and in many cases we allow hospitals, schools, and daycare centers to be built within 100′ of them.
Let’s be realistic. The fears of exploding wind turbines are obviously overblown and the risk is much less than most thing we do in our daily lives. We have all seen stories of those killed when there are accidents on the Interstate or when a train derails (not to mention the environmental damage) yet I don’t recall hearing of dozens of victims from the latest wind turbine failure.
Where is the real danger? Are these lobbyists and consultants so good at their jobs that they now have people convinced that wind turbines are dangerous or that lives are at risk because of them? Is this really what is has come down to? Don’t buy into the fear mongering – think critically.
Craig, I am not against wind turbines but there are hazards other than the one I posted. Wind turbines in areas subject to freezing rain have been known to throw chunks of ice from the blades hundreds of feet.
The transportation incidents you mention are worth planning for. A tanker hauling 91 octane would require up to 1000′ evacuation and pose a low risk of detonation and throwing of debris. Large scale hydrochloric acid spills require a 1/2 mile evacuation zone. Other chemicals such as Chlorine (transported by vehicle, rail and ship ) can require evacuation zones of one mile or more. These are all moving hazards as opposed to a fixed site. Ask the residents of West Texas about having a fertilizer plant in the middle of town.
I still would prefer to be outside the area of the expected debris field.
Wr Old Guy,did you see what the state of Texas did to improve safety after the town blew up? If you found anything,I’d sure like to see it because I can’t find anything.
BTW-we are having blizzard like conditions today. Strong NE winds, heavy snow,low visibility,etc. There are four turbines east and north of me. I will let you know if any explode or whatever when I can see them again.
Mike,
They will be fine as long as they are shut down. It’s when the controls and mechanical parts fail or are run to a speed outside their design strength that they disintegrate rather than “blow up”. They don’t stand up well to tornadoes either but if you are close to one that is about to take a hit from a tornado, the turbine is the least of your problems .
Here is the report on West, Texas released last week by the Chemical Safety Board. I am waiting to see if any of the issues raised are addressed by the appropriate government agencies.
http://www.csb.gov/west-fertilizer-explosion-and-fire-/
To Craig..If you think these will be 15 miles from property lines you are dead wrong. Lincoln County is the third fastest growing county in the nation and a population of over 50k. There are about 4 homes on every section many with young children. The property value loss alone is around 30 percent to 100 percent unsolvable if located within 2 miles of a turbine. These are not farms they are industrial strength machines and they want to place 300 to 500 of them around our homes families etc. If you work your but off for your home do you think it is OK to have it destroyed by greed and a corrupt business that relies on taxing us and destroying non participating land owners? We have the right to peaceful and quiet enjoyment of our homes and land. These create stray voltage, noise, shadow flicker and loss in property value. You don’t build industrial strength power plants around homes. No one chooses to put themselves in that position in most cases. These companies go behind the neighbors backs, they broke the law now they want to get out of a lawsuit as usual. That should tell a person right off the bat how dishonest and greedy they are. Do the research. Their men state they know that property values don’t go down but none of them are registered appraisers in the state that I have found. Read some independent studies on property values alone. 15 miles? No not even try they want to place 500 of them in Lincoln County around every home and acreage and that’s within 1000 feet. Do the research. And as far as money raising against land? Who isn’t going to donate in order to protect their land and homes? Lincoln has one of the highest incomes in the state and those people will fight to protect their families and land from disreputable snake oil salesmen.
“The fears of exploding wind turbines are obviously overblown…”—hee hee!
Craig makes a fair point about comparative risk analysis. We frequently see stories about vehicles crashing into houses and businesses; I don’t think I’ve heard a story yet about a wind turbine damaging a nearby dwelling (although Fighter, I welcome your evidence to the contrary). I support reasonable setbacks for large wind turbines, and DPE and Senator Greenfield haven’t shown us a good reason to repeal the 500-foot setback—usually we require the folks advocating a policy change to prove the need for that change, but they’ve cleverly switched the burden of proof to folks defending the status quo. But I also find the Lincoln County outrage at wind turbines a little funny, given the relatively low risk compared to other daily hazards, like all the cars clogging the roads amidst the Harrisburg–Tea urban sprawl. I recognize that we should have proper setbacks so residents aren’t bothered by noise and shadow flicker, but I also get the sense Lincoln County folks are more interested in keeping land available for housing growth, which will produce far more disruption of residents’ peace and quiet than steadily churning windmills making green energy.
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf
This is interesting. Overseas there seems to be many turbine failures and deaths related to turbines.
“If you think these will be 15 miles from property lines you are dead wrong”
I never said that – surely they will be within 500 feet of “property lines”, but the point is the vast majority of residents will be far away from the actual turbines and the visual impact will be minimal. The county is 578 square miles – which will put the vast majority of residents miles away from the nearest turbine.
“Lincoln County is the third fastest growing county in the nation.”
Can we please be realistic? We all know the only reason that is true is because Sioux Falls is expanding South. The rest of the county is not growing at some explosive rate. Get outside of the Sioux Falls suburbs and growth isn’t significantly different than the population growth of other counties, so let’s not pretend Canton or Beresford is going to explode into the four largest city in the state within the next decade or that they need thousands of acres of development area.
“The property value loss alone is around 30 percent to 100 percent unsolvable if located within 2 miles of a turbine.”
Ok now you’re just being silly. Please cite a reputable source that can support property loss values anywhere near 30% much less 100% within two miles of a turbine. That is simply unrealistic.
However let’s pretend properly loss values of 5-10% are a reality (I wouldn’t even go that far, but it will serve as an example). Is that sufficient reason to refuse to allow such wind development? Are you suggesting that if a project meets all rules and regulations that they should not be allowed due to the impact upon other landowners? Fact is, if you don’t want someone to do something on the land next to you, your only viable option is to purchase the land to prevent such development. Just ask the folks in Southern Sioux Falls who thought they had the right to tell Walmart where they can and cannot build how well that worked out for them.
“We have the right to peaceful and quiet enjoyment of our homes and land.”
Nobody says you don’t have that right. However your rights are not unlimited. This is why we have setbacks and zoning. One property owner cannot restrict the rights of another just because they don’t like what the other is doing. I may not like that a neighbor has a feed lot that stinks when the wind is in the right direction or that a neighbor has a hobby of target shooting very loud firearms throughout the day, but if those activities are legal I have no right to attempt to restrict them.
I’d encourage anyone who is really against wind turbines to travel to the nearest wind farm, park on the road as close to the turbines as possible, and then tell me that they are really as horrible as they originally thought. Better shut off your engine though… because you probably won’t be able to hear the turbine over the sound of the car.
Most of the anti-wind rhetoric stems from misinformation and ignorance. I freely understand not everyone wants a wind turbine next door and I respect that, but the fear surrounding these turbines is unfounded. I still believe the funding sources for this anti-wind campaign would be interesting, because I know many landowners in Lincoln County have already agreed to allow the turbines on their property and the landowners involved in the project are surely not the same people fighting against it.
As is the case in most things…. follow the money.
@mfi – I agree that is interesting, but I’m sure you’ll agree there is a heavy bias in that report. They also seem to be a bit flexible with the amount of “fatalities” they attribute to wind turbines such as including 17 bus passengers who died after the bus crashed into a truck hauling a section of a wind turbine tower. Are we really going to start blaming wind turbines for traffic accidents now?
I did some digging and found the source data for many of these fatalities which you can find here: http://www.portal-energia.com/downloads/resumo-acidentes-aerogeradores-parques-eolicos.pdf What that shows us is that often times these deaths are from traffic accidents or construction accidents unrelated to the actual operation of the turbine.
If you’re curious about the bus crash, as it turns out the driver of the bus was at fault… yet there are some still trying to attribute these fatalities to wind power. http://ecotretas.blogspot.com/2012/05/accident-with-bus-and-wind-tower-on.html
Granted there are some legitimate deaths from maintenance workers falling from towers or from being electrocuted from the high voltage, but in perspective these accidents are extremely rare. I’m certain if we looked at similar accident reports for other energy sources such as oil drilling we would find wind energy is much more safe.
So again you have to wonder where all the fear is stemming from. It isn’t like these wind farms have a habit of exploding and sending shrapnel into daycares and elementary schools – so is the fear just a byproduct of a really clever group of lobbyists and consultants who are trying to convince the public that wind energy is LESS safe than drilling for oil or gas? The whole thing is odd.
Caheidelberger Educate yourself please. It isn’t about preserving land to build on in this county. Only 108 landowners signed up they feel the have the right to trample over the majority who do not want to raise their families and livestock around 500 turbines. Once again do the research I don’t fully children should have to worry about tray voltage or that we should be forced to buy special shades to cover our windows certain hours of the day because of shadow flicker. Go watch a video or spend an extended time near one in all types of weather conditions. No fires may not be common but the noise the loss of property value and the shadow flicker are permanent. Many of these farms signed up are absentee landowners so they don’t have to put up with it. So if you own a car or a home and someone destroys 30 percent or all of the value you would not have a problem with that? One can always tell which people believe propaganda and have never done a lot of research then accuse groups of not raising their own funds to fight against those who would destroy their homes. Why don’t you go to Lincoln County and talk to those opposed and then see what the real truths are? Plus if you don’t agree with these people they will use idle threats. The non participatory land owners have a right to the quiet enjoyment and use of their property. And the Lincoln County planning and zoning job is written that their job is to protect the safety health and well being of citizens. We don’t live in the Cou try so we can listen to turbines 24 7 a day and lose everything we worked for. Turbines don’t belongated only 500 feet from someone else’s property. Even some of the manufactures do not want their own technicians working that close to the turbines. They can throw ice,stray voltage is a huge problem for dairy cattle. There are many reasons and the only idea you can throw out there is we just want to let people build on our land..actually that is not true although since Lincoln County is the wealthiest in the state new homes in the end would bring in far mor increases in property value down the road. Like I said do the research. Talk to a landowner who may not be able to crop dust or build a structure on non participating land because the greed of the wind companies. Put up with being threatened by them too.
East River has already been destroyed. Who cares?
Craig who do you know in Lincoln County? Only 108 signed up in a County with over 900 residences that will be surrounded on all sides. That is far from.a majortiy. You are so misinformed
You are still saying no one will see them. My family owns land 15 miles from the Bon Home farm and it has completely ruined the view all you see even at 15 miles at night is flashing red lights. Oh and please show me 15 miles in Lincoln County without a home that won’t be affected. It’s obvious you don’t live in the wind turbine planned zone in Lincoln County. How is that blatantly obvious? Because those of us that do know that on every square section There are approximately 4 homes so that means that every square mile down here will be in view of them
Don’t believe it affects property values? Go read Mr. McCanns studies all over. Then talk about misinformation to those of us defending our rights our land and our homes. No one should be forced to live in nothing more than an industry sized power plant.
You tell me if your property is going to be destroyed and noise and flashing lights all night long 300 to 500 of them that you would build a home there? I am curious do you live in town or a peaceful country setting? That usually says a lot but what tells me what I need to know is when you think no one in Lincoln County is going to be close to them. You may know people in Lincoln County but you better go get map and a record of the easements then point out where in the county they will be more than even two miles from a structure. The fact is its plainly clear you Don’t know what you are talking about and have no idea who is signed up who didn’t and just how populated it is when there are 4 houses on most sections. They plan to build them with a majority of them within 1000 feet of everyone in southern Lincoln County. Go down and get the public records the land easements are public then map it out and then tell me about ignorance.
Fighter, telling me to educate myself is not the best way to open a conversation.
That said, your opposition doesn’t make sense:
Please, educate me.
Larry, your nihilism does not help.
Cory, horizontal-axis wind turbines represent the past: they’re wildlife killers and eyesores.
Here’s the future:
http://www.jetstream.solar/
(Also, overusing the phrases “The fact is” and “it’s plainly clear” suggest that you are not confident that your claims are facts or that they are plainly clear. Consider educating yourself about rhetoric, “fighter”. ;-) )
The fact remains: East River is a sacrifice zone sitting at the jaws of hell.
Atrazine, glyphosate, neonicotinoids: East River is a chemical melange of death.
The National Association of Realtors is happy to educate us about the impact of wind farms on property values:
http://www.realtor.org/field-guides/field-guide-to-wind-farms-their-effect-on-property-values
Most of the research they cite finds no evidence of statistically significant long-term impact on property values.
I agree that landowners concerned about noise and flicker have a right to protect the enjoyment of their own property. However, as Craig notes, we do not have any solid evidence saying that adjoining property values are negatively impacted in any way that should guide this discussion and the above policy decision. And if, as “fighter” him/herself says, “it isn’t about preserving land to build on,” then why are we even mentioning property values?
Curious, “fighter”, what do you think of the business of the Legislature considering a law to undo regulations and spare a company from paying for violations of current law? Has your group looked into that matter and organized an effort to contact your legislators?
you better talk to a few sellers and realtors who are already trying to lower their prices to sell in Lincoln COunty.
Its too bad you could not come hear Mr. McCanns testimony and before you even start to read check out his credentials. the wind company has no one who is a certified appraiser and a realto in many cases is not a certified licensed appraiser. That is why banks hire appraisers separately.
http://www.windaction.org/posts/26696-testimony-of-michael-mccann-on-property-value-impacts-in-adams-county-Too
This gentlemen also gave testimony on what will happen if a wind farm was put in this close to residences in this county.
http://lincolncountysd.org/userfiles/file/Public%20Submissions/04_15_15_WE_CARE_WIND_PROJECTS_PROPERTY_VALUES.pdf
And by the way oil has nothing to do with my property value so once again that’s like the people when they have no argument who think its Bush’s fault. Get with the present I saY
why don’t you attend a We Care meeting or show up at the Lincoln County Courthouse for the hearings and then you can form an opinion,. If you have not attended then you can continue to believe what you want from unreliable sources
Anyways have a blessed day..may you never be threatened by a wind company who tells you” if you don’t agree you will soon find out the value of your property” when they want to teach you a lesson.
Where can I sign up to become the new owner of those Lincoln County properties that have been reduced in value 100%? I’d like some free Lincoln County land. They raise tremendous corn there, and if the land is free….
They dusted crops here in between and all around 214 wind turbines in Obrien Co., iowa this past late summer.
Have you seen the size of the tractor-trailer rigs it takes to haul a single blade,Craig? They are enormous,they stop highway traffic at bridges and in smaller towns so the trucks can use the entire road. They have to widen gravel roads and intersections to make turns. They are a hazard to everyday drivers.
OTOH,I just threw that link out there. I never said I endorsed it or even agreed with it.
Nick, I’ll split the cost with you! I need a place to bunk when I come down to Democratic Forum. :-)
mfi I have seen many of them and agree they are enormous…. but they are no different than any other legal oversize load out there. They require flag cars and additional lights, cannot travel outside of daylight hours etc. In any case that bus accident I referred to was a case where the bus driver crossed over into the oncoming lane and smacked into the truck pulling a section of tower so I’d hardly consider that a death related to win turbines.
@fighter – I do know Lincoln County landowners, and I’ve discussed the topic with them. Although I don’t know anyone who is planning to have the towers on their property, those land owners I do know have no opposition to the project. Thus I’m guessing opinions vary, but much of the concerns being expressed from the opposition could easily be addressed. Shadow flicker is only an issue when towers are in close proximity to habitable dwellings, and even it can only occur at specific times of the year when the sun is behind the turbine at the angle necessary to cast shadows on property. Surely a wind farm can be designed to minimize and/or eliminate this as an issue and most of the shadows being cast will fall upon farmland where it isn’t an issue.
Stray voltage? Here is another issue I’d need to see some source material on, because I’m skeptical. We allow electrical substations to be built within 100 feet of residences and we allow massive transmission lines to pass overhead of residential property. If “stray voltage” is a concern, then we have a much larger issue than wind farms.
Property values? Seems the jury is out on this one, but the consensus appears to be no significant long-term impact just as Cory’s link indicates. I’ll concede that Michael McCann feels property values will decrease, but he is merely one opinion…. and an opinion that seems to be compensated fairly well each and every time he offers anti-wind farm testimony.
Of course if we dig deeper, it doesn’t look like Mr. McCann has data on his side.
http://www.energyandpolicy.org/mike-mccann
https://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/lbnl-6371e_0.pdf
http://blog.ucsusa.org/john-rogers/do-wind-turbines-affect-property-values-277
So who do we trust? The Union of Concerned Scientists, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and the University of Connecticut all of which cite evidence of a lack of impact to property values including studies of tens of thousands of homes…. or a guy who travels around and spreads his anti-wind farm rhetoric to anyone and everyone willing to pay for the message? I’m only speaking for myself here – but I would really love to see the accounts receivable for Mr. McCann’s consulting firm and see who is truly funding his travels.
Mike, as Craig notes, we carry all sorts of legal oversize loads on our highways. Molded Fiber Glass has to run its turbine blades through the middle of Aberdeen because the state hasn’t had the good sense to lay a Highway 12 bypass around town (turn at Walmart, run it right by Northern Beef Packers!).
And no, “fighter”, the Dakota Access Pipeline is relevant to this discussion. The property value complaint you lodge against wind farms, without sufficient evidence to overcome what Craig and I have presented, is at least as valid against pipelines. We can link-war the crap out of that argument—
http://spectrabusters.org/2014/03/26/pipelines-property-values-and-insurance/
http://scalinggreen.tigercomm.us/2013/12/new-study-finds-oil-pipelines-adversely-affect-property-values/
http://proceedings.esri.com/library/userconf/proc15/papers/109_217.pdf (“…the density of pipelines and proximity to pipelines have significant negative impacts on property values in residential neighborhoods.”)
—but the short form is that “fighter” is going ape about wind turbines but dismissing an at least equal threat from oil pipelines. If I were a suspicious type, I’d be asking to see the Americans for Prosperity membership cards and funding reports. Anyone else smell Koch?
Until you are the owner of property that has any diminished value by an outside source, Craig, Nick, whomever else, your comments have little value. An example, the city yellow striping the street in front of your house no parking. You now have room for two guests to park in your drive. Value reduction? Are you ready to cover the even 10% losses, Craig? That’s about the loss on the new home now sold.
Nick didn’t like XL dominating farm and ranch country.
I don’t like folks having their peace taken by force. Buy them like properties, elsewhere and cover all costs.
BTW, most farm or ranch landowners would love to have the dollars those sites generate. They don’t need to exist in the middle of areas of developments.
10% loss on street parking? Really?
Les – when we buy property, we have certain responsibilities and certain rights. We need to look at zoning, we need to think about development decades down the road, and we need to consider that what exists today may not exist tomorrow.
So when someone builds a home in the country surrounded by farm land, they shouldn’t be shocked when cattle start grazing on the pasture directly adjacent to them. If someone builds on the edge of a city next to a major roadway, they shouldn’t be shocked that the land across the road which is zoned commercial / retail is the new home to a large retail store. When someone builds a home on a busy street, they should be prepared for the day when that street is widened or when the parking lane is transformed into a bike lane or driving lane.
Sometimes there are impacts to property values, but that is part of the gamble we take when we buy property. There is nothing in the Constitution that guarantees us that our property will increase in value each and every year and although people are quick to complain when their values go down, I can’t say as I recall anyone complaining when development surrounded them and helped to drive their values up.
As far as wind farms go, nobody wants to build a wind farm in the middle of massive development. They don’t want them near large residential areas nor do they want them on the edge of town. Typically the towers go in the middle of farmland or pasture where their impact is minimized.
We can and should expect such developments to consider the rights of property owners, and we should expect our elected leaders (city councils, county commissions, state lawmakers etc.) to consider the rights of everyone impacted. However a few individual homeowners should not have the right to cancel an entire project just because they may believe their property value would go down without considering that those who own the land where these towers will reside may see their value go up.
This group has demanded a one mile setback from any residence, which is simply unrealistic. They know that because of the number of homes which have been built on various pieces of land over the past 100 years that most of the area is within one mile of a home, which means there is very little land that would fit the requirement. This setback also doesn’t factor in any topographical changes and is just an arbitrary number with no scientific support to justify why one mile is any better than 1/4 mile or even 500 feet.
Personally I don’t feel a homeowner should be able to dictate what happens on another piece of land one mile away provided that development meets all of the proper requirements and is not in violation of any zoning regulation or law. If we want to debate what the setback for a wind tower should be that is fine, but it should be based upon science… not emotion.
We all need energy but we shouldn’t continue this mindset that it is ok to reap the rewards form other areas without trying to contribute ourselves. The needs of the many often outweigh the desires of the few, and I’m much rather see a wind farm in the country than another coal plant or oil refinery in the same area.
I have nothing against wind power. I do however see the different points of view being expressed here.
We live on a hilltop that is snuggled into the Wayne Hilton Wildlife Area. While studies show it would be a perfect location for wind power, mine says otherwise. Here it would disrupt animal movement and steal the peaceful environment we are trying to keep.
We have been approached to put in a fifteen acre solar farm. Im not to sure about loosing that much ground, we just have to see what our take would be from solar, but the wildlife would be less troubled.
Folks, it isnt about one form of green energy, but many different ideas. To move this country into renewable energy sources it will take everything we can learn from those doing it now. If you are trying to regulate an option because of where it will be in relationship to your property, you should also wrap your mind around all those above ground wires, hydro dams on rivers that took property, and those big yards with all that electric equipment. How about those all important cell towers? I dont see any bitching about those lights. Dont you people have cell towers up there?
If your only interest is, “not in my back yard” you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
The Blindman
Spot on Bill. We need to consider the impacts of our actions beyond what we can see with our own eyes. It is easy for us to forget all the environmental damage our power production causes when it is hundreds of miles away… but those open pit coal mines and those thousands of acres buried under water or the damage caused by climate change is real whether we see it in our backyards or not.
Unless people are willing to stop using energy, we will need to continue to find ways to produce it. Trying to continually make it someone else’s problem won’t solve a thing.
How many of these property devaluations have you experienced, Craig? XL bringing cheap Canadian oil. Im guessing you opposed that for many reasons but probably not for the eminent domain issues. Everyone here is right to some degree. South Dakota is not a land without many sparse areas welcoming for wind.
A mile does seem a bit extreme but I’ve not lived near wind energy. Craig, you?
Its kind of like all those folks wanting the mountain lion to live in my back yard but who call gf&p whenever one gets into their communities.
Any tax that taxes my neighbor more than myself is a good one.
Build a new home for a large family and to host family events and have the city remove your ability to park there and tell me a 10% devaluation isn’t a believable number, Cory. The house just sold and I wasn’t the purchaser as intended before the loss of parking. I was buying because I believed the house was under market by 12% and it ended up selling for 7% under my offer prior to the no parking.