Comments on: City Council Acts on Wind Power, Park Items it's like being there Tue, 16 Sep 2014 04:56:38 +0000 hourly 1 By: Rod Johnson Rod Johnson Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:43:14 +0000 This is true. Wind power is rated “marginal” in this area by NREL. And judging by the Savonius turbine on top of Skyline, AAPS doesn’t have a great track record in the windpower arena.

By: Roger Kuhlman Roger Kuhlman Sat, 26 Jan 2013 22:32:09 +0000 Is anyone on the Council at all knowledgeable about wind-turbine energy? Apparently you just slap the labels “green” and “alternative energy” on something the liberal folks who control Ann Arbor politically will go for it. How much energy will this project produce at what cost? Probably a question it never occurred to them to ask. What happens when the wind is not blowing? Another good question that never occurred to these people. So are just wasting federal and local money so that special interests (of the left-wing kind) can benefit from taxpayer money. I am not in favor of this politically-oriented crony capitalism. Fake and token environmentalism is not something Ann Arbor should support.

By: Observatory Observatory Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:18:36 +0000 What No. 6 said.

This is the gang who gave its top jobs to the ilk of ex Ann Arbor city “public servants” Sue McCormick and retired police chief Barnett Jones.

By: Robert LaJeunesse Robert LaJeunesse Tue, 15 Jan 2013 01:56:10 +0000 I do believe any wind turbine in the city will be educational. It will teach that the federal government can take your money at will and return to you an unsightly monument of immense proportions that occasionally makes noise and produces a bit of electricity. That bit of electricity will never be worth the cost of the machine given the wind normally seen within our city limits. And it will surely teach how the city government and AAPS waste money, and should not be trusted to act intelligently. Enough with the cost – benefit analyses where the cost is ignored as long as the benefit “feels” good!

By: Jim Rees Jim Rees Mon, 14 Jan 2013 18:59:47 +0000 Wind turbine blade failures aren’t all that common as far as I can tell. But they can be spectacular. A failure in Hornslet, Denmark in 2008 threw debris up to 500m, but the failure had been anticipated and no one was hurt. That was a 600Kw turbine, considerably bigger than the 100Kw turbines being considered here. There is a Youtube video of the Denmark failure.

Laker Schools in the Thumb has an installation comparable in size to the one being considered. They seem to be happy with it. But the Thumb gets a lot more wind than we do, according to the DOE maps. I’d be surprised if this project can be made to work economically, but it sounds like there is little financial risk to the City or the schools. I hope the City makes sure the contract is iron-clad.

I do somewhat question the educational value. I suspect the turbine won’t be open for close-up inspection. The power will be fed to the grid, not directly to the school. Do students at Pioneer learn anything about cellular communication technology just because there is a cellphone tower on the school grounds?

By: Walter Cramer Walter Cramer Mon, 14 Jan 2013 17:11:33 +0000 My understanding is that large, modern windmills suffer from occasional mechanical breakdowns, and that “throwing a blade” (or a large portion of one) is not too rare a failure mode.

For wind farms located in rural areas, that is not much of an issue. In the City, close to a school full of children, it’s not hard to see how a (say) 75-foot-long blade, thrown off at considerable speed from a (say) 150′-tall tower, could have tragic consequences.

By: Jack Eaton Jack Eaton Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:16:23 +0000 I am unable to understand why the Council continues to believe the Packard Square developer. He has a record of failing to fulfill his promises. Yet, when he asked for an extension for his site plan, it was granted. Now, his request to cheapen the design of his project is granted. What is the City getting in return for granting his requests?

When a developer with a poor record of keeping promises asks for something, the City should seek something in return. Here, for instance, the City could have asked the developer to post a bond that would cover the cost of demolition, should he again fail to live up to his promises. The couple of million needed to demolish the existing buildings is a drop in the bucket compared to the full cost of this project. If the developer cannot post a tiny percent of the project cost, what is the likelihood that he can deliver on in intent to build the full project?

By: Blaine Coleman Blaine Coleman Mon, 14 Jan 2013 00:34:31 +0000 Yes, City Councilmember Chuck Warpehoski was called on the carpet again for not implementing his own organization’s resolution to persuade Ann Arbor to divest from the Israeli military.

And yes, the public is allowed to demand action from City Councilmembers during public commentary — especially concerning the Councilmember’s own organization’s resolution.

Councilmember Warpehoski’s response was striking.

Without mentioning the situation of Palestine at all, he publicly commended the Interfaith Roundtable of Washtenaw County, led by George Lambrides, as one group in town that is “doing it right.”

To shed light on the Councilmember’s chosen example of “doing it right”, you may refer to the Arab American News article entitled “Interfaith Roundtable forum abruptly adjourned”, at [link]

That article describes an Interfaith Roundtable speaker extolling the so-called “miracle of the Jewish State”.

The article then describes George Lambrides silencing a Palestinian-American woman three (3) times, when she attempted to bring up the situation of occupied Palestinians.

Even more incredibly, the Interfaith Roundtable abruptly shut down its own public meeting a few months later when Palestine rights supporters were spotted in the audience.

At that point, the Roundtable’s Chairperson said that future meetings would be announced via private e-mails, not on the Roundtable’s Web site.

Is this how Councilmember Warpehoski will be disposing of the Palestinian question in the future?

He is already demanding an end to the only Palestine rights vigil in Ann Arbor.

This is an unbecoming posture for Councilmember Warpehoski, especially so soon after the Israeli massacre of Gaza.

To this day, I have not seen the Councilmember condemn the 2012 Israeli massacre of Gaza. I have only seen him condemn the one existing vigil for Palestinian rights in this town.

That is a heartless example for Ann Arbor’s peace movement.

By: Steve Bean Steve Bean Sun, 13 Jan 2013 22:43:30 +0000 “no board could have too many lawyers who […] specialize in corporate and intellectual property law.”

Or could it?