Largely lost in the oil-soaked hullabaloo of the county’s current energy debates, the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Lompoc wind farm was released last week, setting the stage for a Santa Barbara County Planning Commission hearing later this month. With the potential to power as many as 50,000 homes via several dozen turbines in the wind-rich agricultural land of Miguelito Canyon, the project, if approved, would be the first of its kind in the county.
Since early 2006, international wind power firm Acciona has been angling to put as many as 65 turbines-each about 400 feet high-on some 3,000 acres of privately owned land south of Lompoc, adjacent to Vandenberg Air Force Base. While the forecasted energy returns-285 million kilowatt-hours a year-have renewable resource advocates drooling, the project is not without an environmental downside, according to the several-hundred-page document released on Monday, September 15.
According to the report by the Aspen Environmental Group, the wind harvesting farm would have Class I (i.e. “significant and unavoidable”) impacts on views, and on bird and bat populations in the area. As to the former, the bulk of the eyesores would be seen from Jalama County Park. With its coastal location fewer than five miles from the farm, the park would offer views of as many as 13 of the turbines: three along the base of Tranquillon Mountain and 10 more atop the ridge. Additionally, travelers on San Miguelito Canyon Road would be able to see a handful more of the modern-day windmills, while people using nearby Highway 1 would be reportedly inundated with the sight of new power lines and poles associated with the project as it transfers power to PG&E’s Cabrillo substation. (It should be noted, however, that the applicant has offered to re-route the Highway 1 infrastructure through the land it is leasing for the project, such that it won’t be in plain public sight until the edge of Lompoc City proper, according to Acciona’s Harley McDonald.)
courtesy Acciona Energy
There Will Be Wind: If all goes according to plan, dozens of wind turbines will be harvesting wind south of Lompoc by the end of 2009.



Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace




Previous Month



Comments
The wind farm can provide for our transportation needs as well if we build this electrically powered transportation system to accompany it. www.unimodal.net
LasBrisas (anonymous profile)
September 18, 2008 at 11:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Before anyone takes a harsh look at this project and even begins to consider the drawbacks stated in the ERI, let us consider the alternative to this project and the impact made by drilling off our coast by big oil companies. There is no comparison. The unknown numbers of protected bird and bat populations which may be killed could easily be deterred with an electronic device such as a High Frequency Sonic Repeller. Let this project begin.
SSolano (anonymous profile)
September 19, 2008 at 8:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So offshore drilling would be better with small oil companies?
Wind farms are ugly.
Let there be more offshore oil and gas production!!
osotoh (anonymous profile)
September 19, 2008 at 8:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Having grown up in Goleta and lived through the huge negative economic as well as environmental impact of the rig disaster in the 60's it is incomprehensible that anyone would advocate more drilling here. Especially in light of the shipping lanes location, not to mention the huge number of negatives.
I know we tend to be a community of NIMBY's, but who would advocate channel drilling as a positive solution for the idiocy of our current national and global positions?
Ever see photos of what our coast looked like when OIl was allowed free reign? Right, more drilling.
Wind farms? May be ugly to some, but the alternative is far worse. Bird strike can easily be mitigated. Build it.
david3 (anonymous profile)
September 19, 2008 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This debate is so typical of SB. If everyone is right and no one will compromise we'll never make any progress toward energy independence. We need oil. We need gas. We can develop wind power, solar power, and nuclear power. They all have their pros and cons. None are beautiful. All have environmental impacts. And please, let's learn from history (i.e. the Great Oil Spill of 1969) to do things smarter and better and not just as an excuse to do nothing or push the problems off to "the other guy" or "the other state". There should be a special, supersize word far beyond NIMBY for what goes on in SB. And yes, I love the beauty here and think it should be preserved within the scope of the big picture. But I also like shelter, food, heat, etc. And rational, big picture thinking. Not so much emotional rant.
RCMeltzer (anonymous profile)
September 19, 2008 at 9:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So ... how fast do these wind turbines spin? Do they spin so fast that a bird/bat can't avoid them? Dutch windmills are very near the sea, do they harm seabirds? If you can generate enough torque, perhaps you don't need so much RPM?
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
September 19, 2008 at 9:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
By that logic, putting up any large structure like a power tower would also kill birds?
Well, I don't have any dogs in this race, just looking for some solid info to form an opinion. The Wiki link says wind turbines typcially rotate at 5 to 20 RPM and optimally operate in winds around 30mph.
I've found all kinds of web pages about "avian mortality" vis a vis wind power. Some claim its a problem, others claim not so much. Its interesting to see data put up by some people indicating causes of bird deaths are comparatively huge in other areas, and that the studies at Altamont Pass indicate its got a unique set of features that predispose the site to avian mortality. Still undecided however.
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
September 19, 2008 at 10:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)