1. Preserve and Protect
PO Box 6
Wapakoneta, Ohio 45895
www.noauglaizewind.org
Auglaizeunited@bright.net

2. • Ohio is a low capacity wind generation state
• Significant numbers of local agricultural
landowners have not signed leases and do not
support this Mainstream project
• Ohio’s wind industry exists primarily because of
artificial market support from Ohio’s renewable
energy mandate as well as federal and state tax
credits and abatements
• Our County’s Landscape, including The Land of
The Cross Tipped Churches, is too valuable and too
densely populated for projects of this nature

3. • 1 to 5 acre residential parcels up to a mile away from
a turbine may experience a decline in value of
approximately 25% to 30%, and require Property
Value Guarantees to be protected
• Setbacks of approximately 3,500 feet from a turbine
base, 7 times the height of a 500 foot turbine, from
non consenting residential structures are necessary
to address health concerns, about shadow flicker
and noise

4. Our Viewpoint Continued
• The nature of the Process in Ohio requires the County
to either: (1) commit now as to where it stands on
defeat or passage of the PILOT; (2) encourage local
townships to pass zoning ordinances consistent with
the wishes of their residents to exhibit true local
control; and/or (3) Intervene on behalf of concerned
citizens into the Ohio Power Siting Board process
• Wind power may not be green at all and will lead to
increased electric utility rates

6. Project Scope
 Mainstream Renewable Power – Based in Dublin Ireland
 8,000 – 10,000 acres
 Currently have 4,000 to 5,000 acres leased
 Up to 75 Turbines
 Approximately 450 feet tall
 100 to 150 megawatts of generation capacity
 Proposed Capital Investment is unknown at this time
 5 to 10 Permanent Full-Time Jobs
 Proposed Location
 Northern Boundary – Southern Allen County
 Western Boundary – Moulton Fort Amanda Rd
 Southern Boundary – Infirmary Rd
 Eastern Boundary – 25-A

7. What Is Driving This
 Ohio Mandates
 By 2025 25% of power purchased by Ohio consumers must come from
alternate energy sources
 12.5% must be produced by renewable sources such as wind or solar
 Production Tax Credit (PTC)
 Set to expire at the end of 2012
 Began as a $5 Million per year subsidy
 It is now $1 Billion per year
 This equates to $0.037 per kWh
 Nearly 2 Billion Dollars from the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act
 80% of this money has gone to foreign countries
 This has allowed the wind industry to create 6,000 Jobs in foreign
countries
Source: ABC World News Feb 2010 and the Investigative Reporting Workshop
Source: Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard
Source: http://www.masterresource.org/2012/02/wind-panic-awea-ptc

8. Map of Mainstream’s Proposed Wind Farm
Compiled by Auglaize Neighbors United from information provided by Mainstream

9. Some Key Issues
 Landscape
 Property Values
 Health Concerns
 Process
 Lack of Local Control and Zoning
 Economics

10. Landscape

11. Fond du lac, Wisconsin
Source: Chicago Reader, There will be wind, May 14, 2009

12. DeKalb County, Illinois
Source: nowindfarms.com

13. Land of the Cross Tipped Churches
On the National Register of Historic Places - 1979
Thematic Submission
 Not just the Buildings themselves, but also the
Sightlines
 Including St Joseph Wapakoneta and St Patrick
Glynwood
Mercer/Auglaize Visitor’s Bureau
 61 Bus Tours – approximately 40 people each
National Marian Shrine of the Holy Relics
 Approximately 20,000 visitors a year

14. Land of the Cross Tipped Churches
Area and Churches
that are protected:
“Cross Tipped
Churches of Ohio”

15. Land of the Cross Tipped Churches
St Joseph Wapakoneta St Patrick Glynwood

16. Landscape Continued
At Least Nine Concerns:
1. Soil Compaction
2. Crop Damage
3. Damaged Field Tile
4. Does not Specify Location of Service Lanes
5. Restrictions for Additional Buildings and Heights
6. Damage caused from Construction including
waterways and side ditches
7. Length of Contract - 50 years ++
8. Doesn’t Specify Number of Turbines
9. Mainstream can sell leases

17. Landscape Continued
“Whitley
County
Indiana’s
population
density of 90
people per
square mile
exceeds the
normal 20 to 40
density in Iowa
where wind
farms are
located.”
Source: Roger E McEowen, Iowa State Professor
Presentation to a group of citizens in Whitley County IN Summer 2011
http://vimeo.com/26405304

18. • Decommissioning – At the end of the turbine’s useful
life will there be funds available for removal
• Once here the Projects Proliferate - Van Wert up to 300
Turbines
• Champaign County – Phase II of 50 more turbines
proposed even before initial 50 are constructed and
ongoing litigation in the Ohio Supreme Court

19. Property Value
The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory released a
new report: "The Impact of Wind Power Projects on
Residential Property Values in the United States: A
Multi-Site Hedonic Analysis," funded by the U.S.
Department of Energy. It is the most comprehensive
analysis to date in the United States or abroad on the
subject. The research uncovered no conclusive
evidence of widespread property value effects in
communities surrounding wind projects.
Source: NextEra Company Website

20. Property Value continued
Wind farms, residential property values, and rubber rulers
February 16, 2010 by Albert R. Wilson
Real estate appraisal experts are challenging the scientific
credibility and accuracy of a recent US Department of
Energy ('DOE') report on the effect of wind power projects
on property values.
…the Report should not be given serious consideration for
any policy purpose. The underlying analytical methods
cannot be shown to be reliable or accurate.
Source: arwilson.com

21. Property Value continued
Wind Turbine Impact Study 9/12/2009 by Appraisal Group One
Dodge and Fond Du Lac Counties, WI
 1-5 acre properties in bordering proximity (600 ft) ranged
from 39-43% reduction in property value.
 1-5 acre properties in close proximity (1000 ft) ranged from 33-
36% reduction in property value.
 1-5 acre properties in near proximity (1/2 mile) ranged from
24-29% reduction in value.
Source: National Windwatch

22. Property Value continued
Certified Real Estate Appraisers determined that
industrial wind development projects adversely affected
land values within immediate wind zone and peripheral
areas of approximately 2 miles. This is based on
research done in various States for property within 2
miles of wind turbines.
Based on CREA studies, property values declined from
20-43% on parcels within 3 miles of turbine sites.
Source: The Chronicle Express.com, A new Slant on Wind Farms

23. Property Value continued
There is a significant loss of value within 2-3 miles with
value losses measured at 20-40%.
Wind developers have been known to buy out the most
vocal neighbors and then turn around and sell those
same homes for 60-80% below the appraised value,
thus confirming value losses by their own actions.
Sources: McCann Appraisal, LLC and Windturbinesyndrome.com
http://www.knowledgestream.org/kstream/item.asp?item_id=8862

24. Property Value continued
Property Value Guarantees (PVG) Are Necessary
 Financial gain to developer and landowner/lessor
should not be at expense of neighboring property
owner equity
 If applicant believes claim of no property value impact,
then there will be no significant impact to them with a
PVG requirement or condition
Sources: McCann Appraisal, LLC and Windturbinesyndrome.com
http://www.knowledgestream.org/kstream/item.asp?item_id=8862

25. Property Value continued
Town of Hammond in New York, passed a Residential
Property Value Guarantee (RPVG) 12-28-2010
Hammond passed an …“Exclusive option of any
residential property owner living within close proximity
(two miles) to a wind turbine," where a property owner
has a once in a lifetime right to be reimbursed for his or
her real property and five acres surrounding that
residence at the then appraised value, if they follow the
provisions listed in the document.
Source: The Journal, Hammond Panel Adopts Home Guarantee 12/30/2010

26. Health Concerns
Health Effects from Industrial Wind Turbines
• Two categories of effects – those you can see and
feel and those that you hear.
• First category includes: shadow flicker, ice throw
and blade shear (danger from falling parts)
• Second category includes noise that you can hear
(audible) and noise you can’t hear (infrasound)

27. Health Concerns - Setbacks
• Minimum setbacks established in Ohio 4906-17:
• From the property line:
• 1.1 times the total height of the turbine structure
as measured from its tower’s base to the tip of its
highest blade
• Example: 495 feet for a 450-foot turbine
• From the residence:
• 750 feet in horizontal distance from the tip of the
turbine’s nearest blade at 90 degrees to the exterior
of the nearest habitable residential structure
• Mainstream Lease specifies it will not install wind turbines
within 1,200 feet of any occupied residence, without the
prior written consent from Lessor (No contractual
protection for neighboring residence)

28. Health Concerns
Shadow Flicker Analysis – Blue Creek Wind Farm
 There are two primary concerns about shadow
flicker.
 The first is that shadow flicker could potentially
trigger epileptic seizures
 … and the second is that shadow flicker could
become a source of annoyance to residents living
in close proximity to wind turbines.
Prepared by CH2MHill for Heartland Wind LLC, December 2009

29. Health Concerns
Shadow Flicker Analysis – Blue Creek Wind Farm
 There are currently no federal or state standards
regulating frequency or duration of shadow flicker for
wind turbines.
 International studies and guidelines from Europe and
Australia, including the Best Practice Guidelines for
the Irish Wind Energy Industry (Irish Wind Energy
Association [IWEA], 2008), have suggested 30 hours of
shadow flicker per year as the threshold of significant
impact, or the point at which shadow flicker can be
considered a nuisance.
 Heartland Wind used a threshold of 30 hours per year
for this analysis to identify affected residences.
Prepared by Epsilon Associates , Inc for Heartland Wind LLC, April 7, 2010

30. Health Concerns
Shadow Flicker Analysis – Blue Creek Wind Farm
Mitigation Measures –
 Turbine micro-siting to minimize projected impacts,
 Good Neighbor Agreements to offer compensation to
affected residents, and
 Window blinds or curtains, window awnings, and
vegetative plantings to be offered to affected residents,
including those with and without a Good Neighbor
Agreement.
Prepared by Epsilon Associates , Inc for Heartland Wind LLC, April 7, 2010

32. Noise Level Recommendations
• Normal nighttime sounds in a rural area are
between 25 and 35dB. However, an increase to
45dB will sound at least twice as loud, and an
increase to 55dB will sound 4 times as loud.
• Humans perceive a clearly noticeable change with
an increase in sound of 5dB. An increase in 10dB
sounds about twice as loud and an increase in
20dB sounds about four times as loud.
• According to ISO recommendations for community
noise limits, there are NO rural settings where 45 dBA
is acceptable at night.
Study by Marshall Chasin, M.Sc.(C) FAAA,
Centre for Human Performance & Health, Ontario Canada
The “How To Guide to Siting Wind Turbines To Prevent Health Risks From Sound – George W. Kamperman,P.E. and Richard
R. James, INCE

33. Noise levels
 If existing nighttime ambient noise is measured and
averaged over the entire night, the standard will not reflect
the true sound levels during the quietest part of the night:
early evening frog choruses and human activity, along with
pre-dawn bird choruses, tend to elevate average sound
levels well above the actual sound levels during the deep
nighttime hours of 11pm-4am. In practice, it’s not
uncommon for turbine noise of 40 or 45 dB to be 15 or even
20dB louder than the true ambient noise level during the
quietest parts of the night. These are the situations in
which the turbine noise may become especially
problematic for nearby neighbors.1
1 Wind Farm Noise: 2009 in Review. Acoustic Ecology Institute

34. Annoyance associated with exposure to
different environmental noises
40
35
% Highly Annoyed
30
Wind Turbines
25 Aircraft
20 Road Traffic
Railways
15
10
5
0
32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70
Sound Exposure (dBA)
Pederson and Waye, Perception and annoyance due to wind turbine noise
- a dose-response relationship. J. Acous. Soc. Am. (2004)

35. Low Frequency Sound
• There is a considerable low frequency content of
industrial wind turbine sound.
• For sounds that contain a low frequency
component, WHO says the limits on nighttime
noise may need to be even lower than 30dBA to
avoid health risks.
• The presence of amplitude modulation (swish-
boom) limits the masking of other ambient sounds.
Pedersen E and Persson Waye K. 2004. Perceptions and annoyance due to wind turbine noise - a dose-
response relationship. J Acoust Soc Am 116(6):3460-3470

36. What Are the Health Effects?
• Sleep disruption - awaking several times a night
with difficulty falling back to sleep.
Irritability, headaches, difficulty with
concentration and memory. Low level of noise
triggers non-waking arousal during sleep which
disrupts normal sleep stages causing the sleeper to
feel less rested. Prolonged exposure increases
stress and the risk of depression, anxiety, and
cardiovascular disease. Those who find the noise
increase intolerable have the greatest risk of
negative health impacts.

37. How Many Will Be Affected
 Surveys suggest between 10% and 40% of those
hearing sound levels close to regulatory limits may
be disturbed.
 Dr. Robert McMurtry estimates that 25% of people
living within 1.5 miles of turbines experience
disruptions in their daily lives, especially sleep
disturbances, which often balloon into other
health problems.
Wind Farm Noise: 2009 in Review – Jim Cummings
Dr. Robert McMurtry, former dean of medicine- U. of Western Ontario

38. What Distance is Safe
 “Noise produced by wind farms is generally not a
major concern beyond a half mile” 1
 “The vast majority of severe noise issues occur at under
a half mile with significant noise disruption hardly
ever occurring beyond three-quarters of a mile”2
1 2007 report on wind farms and human health from Nat’l Academies of Science
2 Jim Cummings, Wind Farm Noise: 2009 in Review

39. Process
 Contact individual Landowners
 Write leases with individual Landowners
 Contact Township Trustees for permission to place a MET Tower
for Wind Testing
 Once Developer has enough leases to make their project viable
 Pre-application letter 15 days before public meeting
 Certificate application to the Ohio Siting Board
 Ohio Siting Board reviews process
 Ohio Siting Board Flowchart – County can Intervene
 Contact County Commissioners
 Approval or Rejection of PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes)
 Meeting with Superintendents

40. Process Continued

41. Process continued
 No Meetings are required until 15 days after pre-
application letter is submitted to Siting Board
 Only official time in the process for Informing the
community is the Informational Meeting listed above
and once more 60-90 days after submittal for the
Public Hearing in Columbus
 Most other communities like Urbana only learn about
the project after it is too late
 As of 2-14-12, every project submitted to Siting Board
has passed
 8 Approved
 1 Pending
 1 Withdrawn (at request of applicant)
 0 Denied

42. Economics
 Money into the Community1
 $3,000 per MW in Nameplate Capacity (1.6 MW) = $4,800 a
turbine per year
 $1/Lineal Foot for Access Roads (Assume 1,320ft) = $1,320
 $30 per Acre (Assume 100 acres leased per turbine) = $3000
 At 75 Turbines = approx. $684,000 (increased annually 2.5%)
 Construction materials from community
 Estimates of 5 -10 permanent jobs
 County, Township, Schools and possibly Towns to split either
 Property Taxes (approximately $22,300 per megawatt to
schools and townships)
 At 75 Turbines at 1.6 MW = approx. $2,676,000 annually
Or
1 Source : Mainstream Lease

43. Economics Continued
 PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes)
 $9,000 PILOT per Mw
 At 75 Turbines at 1.6 MW = $1,080,000 annually
 Abatement of $1,596,000
 At 10 Permanent Jobs = Abatement of $159,600 per job
 Per Revised Code 5727.75 After Certification of the project
by the Ohio Department of Development as a qualified
energy project local county commissioners must vote to
either deny or grant the tax abatement.
Source: Driscoll & Fleeter Analysis of April 13, 2010 regarding SB 232

44. Production Tax Credit (PTC)
 Adopted in 1992 as a “Temporary” subsidy
 Began as a $5 Million per year subsidy
 It is now $1 Billion per year
 This equates to $0.022 per kWh
 In some areas this equals or exceeds the wholesale power
cost
 Even if allowed to expire this year taxpayers are still
obligated to cover $10 Billion in tax credits for wind projects
built in the last decade
 This is in addition to the nearly $20 Billion in debt already
accrued for wind projects
Source: http://www.masterresource.org/2012/02/wind-panic-awea-ptc/

45. Production Tax Credit (PTC)
 February 15, 2012, Senator Lamar Alexander gives a speech on the floor of the
United States Senate
 He asks Congress to reject any efforts to “put in the payroll tax agreement a four
year extension of the so-called production tax credit” calling it “a big loophole
for the rich and investment bankers.”
 Senator Alexander stated that 20 years is long enough for a wind production
tax credit for what our distinguished Nobel prize winning Secretary of Energy
says is a mature technology
 According to the Joint Tax Committee, Big Wind has received and will receive
between 2007 and 2016 $27 billion
 Senator Alexander said, “And what do we get for these billions of dollars in
subsidies? We get a puny amount of unreliable electricity that arrives
disproportionately at night when we don’t need it.”
 The TVA spent $60 million building 30 big wind turbines to see if they would
work. They discovered the wind blows 19% of the time and is reliable 12% of
the time. The $60 million investment produced 6 megawatts of power over a 10
year period.
Source: Senator Lamar Alexander speech to the US Senate 2/15/2012

46. Economics continued
Some Federal Subsidies
of Electrical Energy Sources per MWH
US Energy information Administration
$23.37
Subsidy Report April 2008
$25.00
$20.00
$15.00
$10.00
$5.00
$1.59
$0.44 $0.25 $0.67
$0.00
Coal Nuclear Nat Gas Hydro Wind
EIA Report 2007 Chapter 5 www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy2/index.html - John
Droz
1 megawatt = 1000 kilowatts

47. Economics continued
Midwest Electric - Wind Power Debate
“…Our concern is with a misguided state and national
energy policy that is forcing these unreliable and
uneconomic systems on the backs of taxpayers and utility
customers….Make no mistake, you will pay for these wind
farms many times over. Quite simply, nobody is putting up
a wind turbine with their own money. Local, state and
federal governments are providing significant tax credits
and subsidies in order to artificially support wind power.
And we all know government money actually comes from
you, the taxpayer.
…the per unit cost (kilowatt hour) is three to four times
higher than electricity …Those higher costs will be
reflected in energy rates”
Source: Matt Berry, Midwest Electric Newsletter 12/8/10

48. Economics continued
Minimal Environmental Benefit
 Wall Street Journal, Aug. 24, 2010
 Wind power’s effect on reducing carbon dioxide
emissions has been “minimal, if any”
 Due to “cycling”: Need to have sufficient base load
generation (ie, coal) ready to ramp up when wind
velocity weakens
 Cycling is very inefficient and can increase greenhouse
gas emissions
 Need to add more fossil fuel plants to back-up the wind
turbines

49. Wind Unpredictability
 Grid operators make “day ahead” projections of wind
energy availability. Wind unpredictability can result
in forecast errors of +20% (300 mW more than
predicted) to -30% (450 mW less than predicted)
 Uncertainty causes planning problems and leads to
higher costs
 As a result, base load plants (ie. coal need to “cycle”
in order to be ready to serve load that wind can’t
meet
 Cycling causes wear and tear; additional fatigue
damage results in shortened boiler life
Source: Buckeye OREC Power Supply Renewable Energy Report Fall 2011

50. Story County Wind Farm, Iowa
 150 megawatts (mW) rated capacity
 Located in central Iowa (among nation’s best wind
production areas)
 Buckeye Power has purchase agreement for 30 mW
 July 21, 2011 – extreme heat wave – peak day in the
history of PJM regional transmission network
 Actual output dropped to zero during PJM peak
 Wind electricity production typically falls during
extreme heat – when utilities need it most
 Production is highest overnight and during months
when electric demand is low
Source: Buckeye OREC Power Supply Renewable Energy Report Fall 2011

51. Hourly Story County Wind
Output During Peak Day
180,000 105
160,000 90
PJM Load
140,000
PJM Load (MW)
75
120,000
100,000 60
80,000 45
60,000
30
40,000
20,000 Story Co. Output 15
0 0
PJM Load Story Co ACT Gen Story Co Max Gen
Source: Buckeye OREC Power Supply Renewable Energy Report Fall 2011

52. Minimal Environmental Benefit
 Wall Street Journal, Aug. 24, 2010
 Wind power’s effect on reducing carbon dioxide
emissions has been “minimal, if any”
 Due to “cycling”: Need to have sufficient base load
generation (ie, coal) ready to ramp up when wind
velocity weakens
 Cycling is very inefficient and can increase greenhouse
gas emissions
 Need to add more fossil fuel plants to back-up the wind
turbines

53. • Ohio is a low capacity wind generation state
• Significant numbers of local agricultural
landowners have not signed leases and do not
support this Mainstream project
• Ohio’s wind industry exists primarily because of
artificial market support from Ohio’s renewable
energy mandate as well as federal and state tax
credits and abatements
• Our County’s Landscape, including The Land of
The Cross Tipped Churches, is too valuable and too
densely populated for projects of this nature

54. • 1 to 5 acre residential parcels up to a mile away from
a turbine may experience a decline in value of
approximately 25% to 30%, and require Property
Value Guarantees to be protected
• Setbacks of approximately 3,500 feet from a turbine
base, 7 times the height of a 500 foot turbine, from
non consenting residential structures are necessary
to address health concerns, about shadow flicker
and noise

55. Conclusion Continued
 The nature of the Process in Ohio requires the County
to either: (1) commit now as to where it stands on
defeat or passage of the PILOT; (2) encourage local
townships to pass zoning ordinances consistent with
the wishes of their residents to exhibit true local
control; and/or (3) Intervene on behalf of concerned
citizens into the Ohio Power Siting Board process
 Wind power may not be green at all and will lead to
increased electric utility rates

56. What steps can be taken
 Public Informational Meetings
 Speak to your neighbors
 Sign petitions
 Letters to Governmental Representatives
 Repeal Ohio’s Renewable Energy Mandate
 Amend Siting Board Legislation
 Full disclosure, Community
representation, Proper setbacks, Re-protect
sightlines to our National Landmark

57. Resources
 Ohio 1st District Senator Cliff Hite
 Senate Building
1 Capitol Square, Ground Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
 Ohio 12th District Senator Keith Faber
 Senate Building
1 Capitol Square, 1st Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
 Ohio 76th District Representative Robert Sprague
 77 S. High St
13th floor
Columbus, OH 43215-6111
 Ohio 78th District Representative John Adams
 77 S. High St
14th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215-6111

58. Resources Continued
 Auglaize County Commissioners 419-739-6710
 Don Regula
 Doug Spencer
 John Bergman
 US Congressman Jim Jordan
 US Senator Sherrod Brown
 US Senator Rob Portman
 www.noauglaizewind.org

59. Resources Continued
 http://vimeo.com/2605304
 http://www.knowledgestream.org/kstream/item.asp?item_id=8
862
 http://www.atinstitute.org/ohio-news-network-covers-ati-
study-of-alternative-energy-portfolio-standard-and-possible-
repeal/
 http://www.atinstitute.org/ati-environmental-law-center-v-
state-of-colorado-renewables-mandate-pt-1-pollution/
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=
MbIe0iUtelQ
 http://www.wind-watch.org/
 http://www.masterresource.org/2012/02/wind-panic-awea-ptc
 http://www.opsb.ohio.gov/opsb/
 http://www.masterresource.org/2012/02/wind-panic-awea-ptc

60. Milo Schaffner – Van Wert, Ohio
 Hoaglin Township Trustee for 11 Years
 Lincolnview School Board for 8 years
 Lincolnview School Board President for 5 years
 Farming since 1974
 Owns 640 Acres
 Owns Schaffner Tool and Die, Van Wert, Ohio