A Dangerous Premise - Zero Facts to Back it Up!

There is what I consider a dangerous premise floating around in the NNY wind energy battle.

There are some, particularly from Cape Vincent (CV), that desperately want you to believe wind developer BP was defeated in CV by participating in the state Art. 10 power plant siting process, and writing restrictive wind regulations into the CV zoning.

Rick Wiley at his CV JLL blog is the leader of this flock.  As a result of this fantasy people feel that wind was defeated in CV and feel everything is just fine now and the town is protected and other towns should follow this lead.  

With the state pressing an aggressive renewable energy scheme, and CV still sitting near a good wind resource, and the state’s ability to override local zoning...this is a dangerous chute Wiley and others are leading the sheep into! 

So let’s look at reality. Because there is actual evidence to take apart this fantasy!

BP decided around 2013 to sell off its wind business around the globe.  Not just in CV.  Not long before they exited the solar business as well.   In large part this was due to financial issues brought on by their Gulf oil spill and the possibility the federal tax breaks for wind would expire soon.

As evidence that this premise of defeating BP in CV  is a lot of nonsense, it is important to note that at approximately the same time BP was exiting CV, Iberdrola abandoned  their wind project in Hammond, NY, and  they also shelved their Horse Creek project in Clayton, NY. And the Galloo Island project went on hold.  Again most likely due to the uncertainty surrounding federal tax breaks.

It was NOT just CV...it was a trend in the whole industry as wind projects across the country lagged.  BP was NOT defeated in CV by any zoning law or participation the the state Art 10 siting process! 

Although with an extension of the tax credits the Clayton and Galloo projects have  gained life again.  More evidence this was a major factor...not a zoning law.   

Now ... knowing the REALITY of what occurred with wind energy locally and around the US, and BP’s particular financial issues read what The Watertown Daily Times says about some CV officials who were in the Art 10 and wind law process.

“They argue that Cape Vincent’s decade-long wind battle with BP, which abandoned its effort in 2014, illustrates that the development of a strong zoning law is the most effective ammunition against wind projects."

That is a great fantasy...but the FACTS simply DO NOT support that claim!  Besides, Clayton has a relatively strong wind law, and guess what...Iberdrola is right back reviving its Horse Creek project in the Art. 10 process now the federal tax breaks are in play again and the hopes of a Clinton presidency, and they are confident they can get the state to override Clayton’s zoning law.  The Lighthouse wind project in W. NY is facing tough wind laws and they are still plugging forward.

Then you have this fairy tale from the chairman of the committee who drafted the CV wind zoning.

“Although BP challenged Cape Vincent’s zoning law during the Article 10 review, he said, the PSC decided not to override it.

“BP asked them to throw it aside early in the process, and they didn’t do it. The assumption is they decided it was valid,” said Mr. Brown...” 

Well you assumed wrong Mr. Brown, and there are ZERO FACTS to back your claim.  I have been through the official Art 10 record many times on the CV/BP matter and there is NOTHING in the documentation that supports this nonsense.

Yes... in the Art. 10 process there was discussion at the official level of the CV zoning, but the NYPSC never made any official declaration of any kind that it was upholding the CV law against BP...NONE!

Why is this so inaccurate?  Simply because Brown and some people in CV, so overly committed to their approach, want to desperately believeand want YOU to believe  this actually happened and they defeated BP in this manner attempting  to validate what they did.  It is a dangerous and false message to pad some big egos.

Here are the FACTS.  The Art 10 process was NEVER COMPLETED in CV since BP walked away from their project for financial reasons.  They were NOT defeated by local laws!  The process NEVER reached the point at the end in a public hearing where CV could defend their law and the siting board would either waive the law or uphold all or parts of it.  Brown is badly misrepresenting the facts.

The NYPSC may not have over turned the zoning at a request from BP up front, but that was because it would have been inappropriate at that time and they weren’t at the proper point in the process to address that matter, plus the town had not had the opportunity to defend its law  in an official manner before a public hearing before the Art 10 siting board.

The NYPSC essentially did NOTHING...and we have ZERO clue whether they would have upheld OR overturned the CV zoning as BP requested.  We NEVER reached that point in the Art 10 process, and the process was never even finished.  There is no way to know how it would have turned out.

I challenge anyone, particularly Mr. Wiley, Mr. Brown, or anyone perpetuating this fantasy, to find any OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION in the NYPSC CV/BP record that the Art 10 siting board officially made a statement upholding the CV zoning law and post in here or on Wiley's blog.

Besides if that had occurred, it would have been a HUGE news story given the controversial nature of the NYS and local wind issue!

It is a bit frightening that the people who wrote the CV zoning and participated in the Art. 10 process for months, and their supporters like Wiley, are so far askew of the facts and then advising other people how to handle the wind issue.  

Of course if you consider this in context, that about a year after Brown led the CV zoning law effort, he and other zoning officials screwed up reading, interpreting, and applying simple provisions in the new CV zoning THEY WROTE, that it was a huge embarrassment that even made front page news in the WDT paper.  

And of course Mr. Wiley never reported those facts on his blog!

Apparently he and the CV zoning officials didn’t have a grasp on the issue even back then!

Yet these people are now running around suggesting we should follow CV’s zoning and Art 10 process example...when they don’t even understand the FACTS of what happened and later screwed up their own zoning and they have NO CLUE how the process would have concluded because it never finished!

The game was called... there was no score... actually the score was against them, and they are trying to convince  you they won and should bet on their team’s approach!  It is just plain NUTS!!!