Wind Energy Project Approved for Lompoc
(stock photo)
By edhat staff
The Santa Barbara County Planning Commission approved a wind energy project for Lompoc this Wednesday.
After a lengthy meeting, the commission voted unanimously for BayWa's 98 megawatts Strauss Wind Project in the hills south of Lompoc. This will be Santa Barbara County's first wind farm.
The project plans to place 29 wind turbines that are nearly 500 feet tall on approximately 3,000 acres near Miguelito Canyon and a 5,000 square foot operations building. This is the same location as the previously-approved Lompoc Wind Energy Project from 2009 that was scrapped due to the recession.
The turbines can produce enough electricity for 43,000 homes and will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 40,000 metric tons per year. It also provides an estimated $40 million in tax revenue over the project's 30-year life span, creates 150 temporary construction jobs and 4 to 6 permanent jobs, and will allow local ranchers to continue agricultural operations while receiving supplemental income, according to the project's supporters.
The majority of public attendees supported the project although concerns were raised about the potential effect on birds and removing oak trees.
The Community Environmental Council stated the modified final project includes micro-siting turbines to reduce impacts to birds, reducing oak tree removal by 87%, and requiring that 10 oaks be planted for each one removed.
The project is expected to be completed late next year.
Comments Penalty Box
No Comments deleted due to down vote
5 Comments deleted by Administrator
54 Comments
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 12:57 PM"reduce impact to birds." Ohhh-kay. How many birds will die then, annually? Bats? What is the acceptable number? As for replacing one mature oak with 10 saplings, that's the biggest joke to come down the pike. We all saw how well that went when all the oaks were slaughtered to make way for vineyards. Where are these sets of 10 oaks planted? How many decades before one of the 10 provides shade or any resemblance to habitat?
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 01:16 PM12:57 - this might interest you if you are really concerned about the birds: https://grist.org/climate-energy/for-the-birds-and-the-bats-8-ways-wind-power-companies-are-trying-to-prevent-deadly-collisions/
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 01:33 PMAnd how many more animals of all kinds will die if we continue to spew CO2?
Comment has been deleted by edhat
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 03:23 PMThey aren't really concerned with birds, any more than forced birthers are really concerned about babies.
Comment has been deleted by edhat
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 01:03 PMSanta Barbara COUNTY Planning Commission. There's a difference, unless somehow Santa Barbara has illegally annexed portions of Lompoc (like they did the Goleta airport).
Comment has been deleted by edhat
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 01:11 PM12:57 - modern wind turbine technology has plenty of effective bird and bat repellent/deterrent solutions. Don't worry, no more birds or bats will get struck than the amount of wildlife suffocating in oil spills, being displaced/killed by construction of wells, etc....
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 01:27 PMHogwash
Comment has been deleted by edhat
Comment has been deleted by edhat
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 01:29 PMnext they will probably plant cannabis on the land underneath the windmills...imagine that combination!
Comment has been deleted by edhat
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 01:51 PMIn order to replace dirty energy which is making our planet less and less hospitable (not to mention historic surges in extinctions which should send a chill up our spines) we need wind solar and a Manhattan Project for renewables. Cats kill far more birds than wind turbines ever will, while fighting wind farms you should also fight outdoor cats, tall buildings and your picture window. It's impossible to produce energy without environmental impact, the idea here is to lessen impact while producing exponentially less CO2's. Until the silent invisible zero impact energy comes along we're going to need solar and wind farms in as many places as feasible, weighing local impact against the tons of CO2's that won't be produced. Stand behind the science and make real change!
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 02:06 PMBe sure to find out how windmills & solar panels can be manufactured and installed without using fossil fuels and what the process is to dispose of them when they reach the end of their useful life.
Comment has been deleted by edhat
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 02:12 PMKOHN1 - why are you so against renewable energy? Is it because you are worried that renewable energy sources are going to hurt the environment? Is it because you support fossil fuels so intensely that you dislike all competition? Is it because you hate liberals and are just following your party line? What is it?
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 02:37 PMI'm not against renewable energy at all but wind and solar are not the answer. Too many drawbacks.
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 02:49 PMKOHN1 - and oil doesn't have any "drawbacks?" No need to bash renewables just because of a few issues. ALL energy has pros and cons.
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 06:17 PMAs I set Out above, wind is especially energy consuming (typically needs lots of coal energy to fabricate as each one uses 2500tons of concrete and 900 tons of steel plus 45 tons of unrecyclable fiberglass that requires a landfill 20yrs later. And of course all the diesel trucks to deliver the goods, truck away broken blades and deliver the workers back and forth for routine and unplanned maintenance.
If one wants to be green for climate change purposes, one must make lifecycle calculations. Never mind the birds and bats. https://www.americanexperiment.org/2019/08/argus-leader-sioux-falls-landfill-tightens-rules-minnesota-dumps-dozens-wind-turbine-blades/
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 10:18 AMCan you send a link for the numbers you cite for building one turbine?
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 02:27 PMUNBELIEVABLE that the Envoronmentalists let this happen... These giant wind machines produce so little engery and the props are NOT "Green" and need to be replaced so often that it kills any benefit... ALSO THESE KILL THOUSANDS OF BIRDS, ESPECIALLY BIRDS OF PREY like Turkey vultures, Coopers Hawks and Redtail Hawks... Just look for the PILE of dead birds underneath these abortions.
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 03:28 PM"produce so little engery" Wrong. "are NOT "Green"" Wrong. "need to be replaced so often that it kills any benefit" Wrong. "PILE of dead birds underneath" Wrong.
Comment has been deleted by edhat
Comment has been deleted by edhat
Comment has been deleted by edhat
Comment has been deleted by edhat
Comment has been deleted by edhat
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 03:33 PMA tiny fraction of the birds killed annually are killed by windmills. The people who trot out this argument are grossly dishonest (it's a way of life for them) and don't care about birds. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/09/15/wind-turbines-kill-fewer-birds-than-cell-towers-cats/15683843/
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 06:10 PMPerhaps they don’t kill as many birds and bats but the real legacy is they’re massive hunks of fiberglass that need all sorts of fossil fuels to be manufactured, shipped and installed. If you care for reducing total greenhouse gases, you need to calculate all of the factors in your decision. If you care about virtue signaling how “green” you are then windmills might be a good option.
Also, start planning for them to be repaired often and need electricity to start spinning. Lastly, start digging new landfill space bexisss there is no known means of recycling fiberglass windmills so after 15-20yrs these costly babies will need to be taken down and loaded on diesel trucks to be carted away to be processed. Be sure to calculate that. In the Midwest, there is already difficult disposing of legacy windmills from 20yrs ago as the states that used to take the refuse no longer want it.
Windmill require 900 tons of energy hungry steel, 2500 tons of concrete.
This link is from a right leaning website so just tell me how you can dispute their factual assertions not as hominem attacks on them for writing it or me for linking it to it. I’d love for wind to work. I’ve got 2 teslas and two properties with solar so I’m not “anti”- I just know they’re economically and environmentally inefficient on a large scale. Thanks.
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 06:11 PMSorry here’s the link https://www.americanexperiment.org/2019/08/argus-leader-sioux-falls-landfill-tightens-rules-minnesota-dumps-dozens-wind-turbine-blades/
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 06:40 PMYou couldn't be more wrong. I care about birds. I love birds. I know cats kill millions of songbirds annually. Birds are hit by vehicles, birds hit windows, birds are killed by pesticides. It's a wonder there are any birds left. What I don't get is how it's somehow okay that wind turbines kill birds and bats and some people nod their heads and say
"We're fine with that. No big deal."
Comment has been deleted by edhat
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 09:16 PMSo, I agree with many comments here and believe we all want cleaner energy. What gets me is that you can't go to the beach in Lompoc most of the year, because of the plovers. However, it's no problem killing other birds. Especially raptors who have a low reproductive rate and are especially vulnerable, due to their flight behaviors, to these wind turbines. Also, as noted, everything that goes into building, disposing of and paying for these 500' death traps. So, everyone thats all for it, Your all good with these things being in YOUR neighborhood..Right? Yeah..
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 09:25 PMDiablo May be old and decrepit but a new nuclear facility would be much better for the CO2 aspect. All these green solutions require huge battery banks to store the excess energy. Nuclear should be a far more popular solution but it’s... radioactive. Keep in mind fumoshima and Chernobyl were the result of poor design and planning and perhaps too large of a scale. But smaller scale nukes have promise. The government does zero research into it.
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 12:44 AMNo. No nuclear power plants, no LNG, nothing that can create even bigger disasters than oil spills.
Comment has been deleted by edhat
-
-
-
Nov 22, 2019 11:39 PMamericanexperiment.org is a right-wing mouthpiece for anti-environment propaganda, as you'll see if you just go to the home page. Praise for mining operations, denigration of anti-pollution standards, pushing trade schools over higher education. You name it, if it's an egotarian hot-button, they have an article on it. Just another dark money "thunk tank".
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 09:07 AMI already disclosed that it is right wing. It’s right wing Because the left wing is hysterical about climate alarmism and doesn’t like to do the Environmental life cycle calculations just as you don’t do the calculations. That applies to all leftist policies foisted by the private jets class on the proletariat. Think Obama is going to Want anyone to stick a wind farm in front of his new $15m ocean front Martha’s Vineyard pad? “Windmills for thee but not for me” he says as he flies his gulfstream from conference to conference and talking about our biggest national security threat- climate change. Hopefully his solyndra buddies have some of that $800m tax dollars stashed away to host him as well.
Anyway,
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 01:44 PM9:07 AM - Starting to flail and foam at the mouth, are you?
Comment has been deleted by edhat
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 12:09 AMIf you want to see a balanced discussion about wind energy, instead of the biased hit-piece referenced below, visit: https://www.energy.gov/eere/wind/advantages-and-challenges-wind-energy
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 09:24 AMMac- so looked at the DOE site and wouldn’t you know it, they leave out the lifecycle costs, and lifecycle pollution (from manufacturing to transporting the behemoths, to transforming the site, to Maintaining and decommissioning (Often earlier than planned) and the lifecycle *pollution* also from manufacturing, building but also the massive landfill waste as there are no windmills that can be recycled. None.
The local government surely doesn’t look at any of this and instead likes to approve these boondoggles to create some local jobs and pat themselves on the back for fighting climate change and saving the world.
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 12:14 AMThis was from earlier in the year: 900 wind turbine blades going to the landfill in Wyoming. **** https://www.wyomingnewsnow.tv/content/news/Casper-Regional-Landfill-begins-burying-560707701.html *** They can’t be recycled, and they won’t break down. These are from just 3 wind farms in one state. I wonder how many 1000s of blades in California will have the same fate in a couple decades.
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 12:21 AMYeah, somehow it's better to put tons of crap in the air, instead?
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 12:47 AMAnother thing to consider is that the blades aging out now are from 20 year old designs and technology. Newer carbon-fiber blades have a much longer lifetime.
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 09:02 AMMacpuzl- that’s wishful thinking. Yes the biggest ones use some carbon fiber along with fiberglass, but they still aren’t recyclable. And they still last at the very longest 25yrs and then become huge dismantling projects as set out above.
Again, keep your eyes on the prize. The government in partnership with these companies like GE are foisting these costly and polluting “solutions” on us using our tax dollars. Focus on lifecycle pollution and natural gas is vastly better than tilting at windmills.
https://www.ge.com/reports/catching-wind-ge-acquires-worlds-largest-turbine-blade-maker/
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 09:12 AMMacputz- Most modern Blades are mostly fiberglass and maximum lifespan is 25yrs according to the nearly bankrupt GE’s own literature. That means 20yrs real world. https://www.ge.com/reports/catching-wind-ge-acquires-worlds-largest-turbine-blade-maker/
Also, as for it being a hit piece, it was linking to a factual news report of how these blades are filling up landfills. Wake up.
-
-
-
Nov 23, 2019 12:11 PMAgain, even if tons of disposed blades go to landfills, you prefer dumping the gigaton residue of carbon-based production into the atmosphere?
Pages