2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Not close enough. Instead I live near a freeway and many large buildings in downtown Portland. I wish I lived closer to one, I find them to be lovely.

posted 2 years, 6 months ago
view in context

Perhaps the guest who feels that wind developments reduce property values should have a look at this report by the LBNL: http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/lbnl-2829e.pdf

Exec Summary: Wind developments do NOT reduce property values. This is rooted in actual data, not just perception.

posted 2 years, 6 months ago
view in context

I think there are many people who live across the state who work for these "out of state corporations" and spend their money in Oregon. Who cares if the paycheck comes from an out of state organization, wind developments create jobs for Oregonians.

And in this day and age it seems like we are in need of both jobs and electricity. Why not put Oregonians to work for the cleanest type of energy that is feasible today (rooftop solar is awesome, but just not realistic yet.).

posted 2 years, 6 months ago
view in context

Good points all around- I completely agree that the appropriate studies must be undetaken in order to properly site a wind facility. In Oregon, I think the state and local jurisdictions do require the correct level of scientific analysis for these studies (noise, flicker, wildlife, etc.). You should check out the OR EFSC website, which has information about the different projects as well as the mitigation plans for each.

As for modeling climatic change and micro shifts in habitat usage by wildlife- I'm not aware of this level of scrutiny required for any development. If we require this for wind, we should certainly require it for coal, oil, gas, hydro, and nuclear generation facilities. Also, I'd be curious to know if these shifts may occur to a noticable degree over the 20-30 year lifespan of a wind facility? When a wind facility is in need of repowering, it is likely better technology will replace the old wind turbines, and thus the siting process (including those wildlife studies) will need occur all over again. This may mitigate your concerns about climate change induced shifts in landscape usage by wildlife.

Overall you raise good points, many of which we can be worked through with some effort by developers, planner, and other experts.

posted 2 years, 6 months ago
view in context