LOWELL — Lowell residents and some of their neighbors who are debating the wisdom of bringing a major wind farm to town face a major handicap. The project has yet to be defined in concrete terms.
At a meeting Thursday night, November 5, they heard that Green Mountain Power is anxious to put a wind farm atop Lowell Mountain, and that their local utility, Vermont Electric Cooperative, is no less anxious to buy some of its power.
They heard from scientists who have studied birds and bats and bears on the mountain, looked for rare and endangered plants and animals, considered the views that would be affected and sampled the rocks that might be disturbed.
But, aside from assurances that noise from the towers won’t be a problem and there’s no asbestos-bearing rock on the mountain to kick up dust, residents were told they’d have to wait to the end of this year to see the results of the studies.
Meanwhile the project’s size, the number of towers and their height, and the financial consequences for the taxpayers of Lowell remain moving targets.
The project, said Charlie Pughe of Green Mountain Power, would have a total capacity of between 36 and 63 megawatts. And depending on that decision, payments to the town treasury would range from $400,000 to $535,000 a year.
Confusion only deepened when many people who attended Thursday’s meeting returned to the Lowell Graded School Monday night for a hearing convened by the state Public Service Board (PSB).
The issue was much narrower: could Green Mountain Power put three test towers on the mountain to sample the winds and other weather conditions?
The problem, as it was teased out of Green Mountain Power representatives over the course of Monday’s hearing, is that any information the towers might provide would come too late to help Lowell residents decide whether to vote for the project, or the utility to decide whether to apply for the certificate of public good it needs from the PSB.
According to a document she handed out Monday, PSB hearing officer Mary Jo Krolewski isn’t scheduled to give her “proposal for decision” to the full board until January 7.
Even if the towers could be erected in the dead of winter, they could hardly be expected to yield useful data in time for the citizens’ vote, tentatively scheduled for Town Meeting in early March. Or in time, indeed, for Green Mountain Power to file for its certificate of public good. Assuming they get the Lowell voters’ approval, the utility plans to file that application later in March.
That led one critic of the project to denounce the test tower proposal Monday night as “nothing but a sham.”
Another critic, state Representative Duncan Kilmartin of Newport, called it “nothing but a ruse to get the camel’s nose in the tent.”
Mr. Pughe finally explained that Green Mountain Power has five years’ worth of data collected from wind towers erected by an earlier would-be developer, enXco, between 2003 and 2008.
Landowner Trip Wileman obtained that data after he decided not to renew a wind development option with a foreign company, but to seek financial support for a wind farm that could be built and operated by and for Vermonters. The deal with Green Mountain Power is the result, though the utility says it is also negotiating with two unnamed landowners whose property runs south of Mr. Wileman’s, to the Eden town line.
Based on the earlier data, Mr. Pughe said Monday, “we feel strongly this is a project that will work.”
Data from two higher, 262-foot towers would give Green Mountain Power a better sense of the wind on the mountain, Mr. Pughe said.
But before that happens, he added, “we’ll file for the permit. If we find out later the wind is no good, there we stop.”
Green Mountain Power’s right to call itself a Vermont company was challenged at both meetings.
“Why is Green Mountain Power calling itself a Vermont corporation?” Jim Goodrich from Albany demanded Thursday night. “It’s owned by Gaz Métro.” The Quebec company, a major supplier of natural gas, bought Green Mountain Power in 2007.
“Green Mountain Power is in fact a Vermont corporation,” its president, Mary Powell, replied. “We are a Vermont corporation regulated by the state of Vermont.”
“But the money doesn’t stay in Vermont,” Mr. Goodrich said.
Ms. Powell replied the Canadian owner is entitled to a return on the money it invests in Vermont. But, she added, there is a maximum rate of return of just over 9 percent imposed on utilities by the PSB. Unregulated wind power developers generally look for a return of 18 to 22 percent, Ms. Powell said.
Another critic of the project, John Day, raised the issue more colorfully at Monday’s hearing. “Lowell should not be invaded by a foreign company,” he said.
The project’s potential impact on property values was hotly debated Thursday night.
Speaking for Green Mountain Power, David Raphael of LandWorks, a Middlebury consulting firm, said there would be none.
“The most recent studies found no negative impact,” Mr. Raphael said.
That was challenged by Dan Maclure, who heads Century 21 Farm and Forest Realty, Inc., of Orleans. “I’ve got a farm for sale that borders that property,” Mr. Maclure said. When he tells a potential buyer there’s a wind farm planned next door, he said, “I escort them down the hill and they’re gone.”
Carol Brouha of Sutton, a veteran of the battle against the Sheffield wind farm, was more outspoken.
“It’s surreal for you to stand there in front of us and tell us there will be no impact on real estate values,” Ms. Brouha said. She cited a Texas study that found a 40 percent drop in the value of property surrounded by wind farms.
“For you to tell us there’s no impact is like you telling us the Emperor has new clothes when he doesn’t have any,” Ms. Brouha said.
On Monday night, Lowell Treasurer Pam Tetreault said she had called the listers in Searsburg, where Green Mountain Power has run a smaller wind farm for some time. “They did not have any negative impact on their land values,” she said.
The utility’s assurance that noise would not be a problem at their project was also challenged.
The assurance came Thursday night from Ken Kaliski of RSG, Inc., in White River Junction, another consulting firm hired by Green Mountain Power.
He referred to noise complaints from neighbors of the Mars Hill wind farm in northern Maine.
“Mars Hill was the first large wind farm built in Maine,” Mr. Kaliski said. “A lot of lessons have been learned since. We’ve taken those lessons learned, and there will be no adverse impact.”
In Mars Hill, complaints about noise from the wind towers came from people living as far distant as 3,000 feet, Mr. Kaliski said. Except for one “involved landowner,” he said, “all the homes in this area are in excess of 3,000 feet away.”
That was challenged on two fronts. Marjorie Kramer of Lowell said the people of Mars Hill are calling for a 1.5-kilometer setback from wind farms, just under 5,000 feet. “Why don’t we use 5,000 feet?” she asked.
Mr. Kaliski replied that there was no scientific basis for that figure. “It’s based on anecdotal evidence,” he said. “We are using scientifically based, safe sound limits.”
At Monday’s hearing lawyer David Stackpole spoke up for families that share a camp on Lowell Mountain which, he said, does not appear on the maps used by Green Mountain Power.
The camp, Mr. Stackpole said, is visited from March to early December by three generations who often stay overnight. It needs to be taken into consideration with regard to noise and lights, he said.
Green Mountain spokesman Dotty Schnure said Tuesday that the camp was missed because it was not on the 911 list the utility used to locate buildings. She said the utility would go to Lowell to determine whether the camp sits within the 3,000-foot radius.
Wind power in general — and the Lowell project in particular — had their supporters at both meetings.
Ted Fleischer of Lowell talked of the impact of strip mining for coal in the state he left for Vermont 20 years ago. If he had to choose between wind and coal power, he said, he would choose wind hands down.
Jeff Parsons of Lowell, an environmental consultant, compared wind power to the huge Hydro Quebec dams at James Bay.
“I want to look at what the damage is when I turn on my lights,” he said Monday night. “I’m willing to look at the aesthetic impacts — if that’s what they are.”
Hilary Elmer also challenged the idea that wind power should be barred because it’s ugly. If people want their homes to look like they did 100 years ago, she suggested, “perhaps they should get rid of their electricity.
“We use electricity,” Ms. Elmer said, “and we’ve got to get it from somewhere. To me, wind energy is responsible.”
Mr. Kilmartin wasn’t the only critical politician at Thursday’s meeting. Senator Bobby Starr of Troy supported the idea that the member-customers of Vermont Electric Cooperative should have a say.
“The ratepayers should have the opportunity to vote if they want this project,” Mr. Starr said. “I know you could sell snow to Eskimos, but I’m concerned about your members being snowballed by these professionals.”
Earlier, in response to a similar suggestion, David Hallquist, the co-op’s chief executive officer, said the elected board of directors had made up its own mind.
“Our board felt it was their job to provide leadership for you,” he said. “You have the opportunity to elect new directors next year.”
Mr. Starr also expressed some doubts about the wisdom of the regulators who sit on the PSB.
When skeptics challenged FairPoint’s takeover of Verizon’s land line services, he recalled, the PSB said there was nothing to worry about. “These are the supposedly great regulators who are regulating these folks.”
Paul Brouha of Sutton recalled that, when the Ridge Protectors tried to stop the Sheffield project, “we had to deal with the same parade of experts before the PSB. Our experts were completely disenfranchised in that process.”
Rob Pforzheimer of Sutton, who is also active with the Ridge Protectors, had harsh words for the state Department of Public Service as well as the PSB.
The former was represented Monday night by Geoffrey Commons, who said the department, as the public advocate in utility matters, would eventually take a position on the proposal.
“The Public Service Department advocates only for developers, ignoring everything we told them,” Mr. Pforzheimer said. “They went along with the developer every time, and so did the Public Service Board.”
On Monday night, other opponents made appeals for fairness that suggested a belief that the deck was stacked against them.
Of commercial wind power, Milo Day of Lowell said, “it’s all about power, but it has nothing to do with energy.”
And Shirley Nelson of Lowell ended her opposition to the project this way: “Please don’t let our state, our county and the Northeast Kingdom be destroyed by bullying and bribery.”
Important Stories 
