Foundation Icebreaker Discussion Points 7/13/2018

Background Icebreaker is the first proposed freshwater offshore wind turbine facility to be located in the Great Lakes. It is a “demonstration” “pilot” project which essentially consists of six (6) wind turbine generators, submerged collection cables and a facility substation connected to the Cleveland Public Power System. The turbines will have a 3.45 MW each for a total project capacity of 20.7 MW. The six (6) wind turbines will have a total tip height of 479 feet and they will be located 8 miles northwest of Cleveland.

Status On July 3, 2018, the Ohio Power Siting Board staff recommended that the OPSB Board approve it- provided that LEEDCo can meet nearly three dozen conditions. Among the conditions, LEEDCo install sophisticated radar equipment at the site on the lake before the six turbines are installed and remain operating for two years once operations begin; eliminate overnight operations from March 1 to Jan. 1 unless they can prove to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and the siting board staff that the six wind turbines are not a threat to migrating birds and bats.

The OPSB will hold a Public Comments Hearing on July 19th. Then an Adjudicatory Hearing on August 6th where official intervenors will argue their cases. If the OPSB approves, construction would begin in 2020 for completion in 2021.

Icebreaker is to be the first “demonstrator” phase of a wind project. If Icebreaker is successful, the next phase is to build an additional 1,400 to 1,600 wind turbines throughout Lake Erie.

Why does this issue concern LEF? Our mission is to “create and maintain a healthy Lake Erie now and forever as defined by drinkable water, recreational contact and edible fish.”

We’re working to create a healthy Lake Erie by fighting to reduce the HAB’s and reducing the Dead Zone. And we’re putting a lot of time, money and effort into the fight.

If our mission is to also maintain a healthy Lake Erie, allowing thousands of 480’ tall industrial wind turbines to be built, runs contrary to that mission.

1) Environmental concerns Lake Erie was once called a "dead lake", but is now a thriving fishery, source of drinking water, and home to countless waterfowl especially the comeback of bald Eagles along the shoreline.  Lake Erie’s an internationally important migration route. Many raptors have been killed near wind projects because Eagles and Hawks look down for prey when hunting, causing them to not see the blades that they are flying into. The changes in air pressure around operating turbines cause bat lungs to implode.  The BSBO, Amer. Bird Conservancy & National Audubon Society believe that by insisting that LEEDCO completes bird & bat studies through the right process and the right science, it will prove that turbines shouldn’t be built in Lake Erie. So even though BSBO folks have told me that they personally oppose Icebreaker, as an organization, they’ll let the science prove their case.  Until the 1980s, multiple toxins, including PCB, dioxin, mercury, cadmium, lead and arsenic were filtering into the lakes. The Army Corp’s has been dumping toxic sediment from the Cuyahoga River into Lake Erie for close to 100 years. Much of that "toxic soup" is thought to be encapsulated, buried beneath years of cleaner sediment and sand. There is an increased risk from stirring up toxic sediments while building foundation & laying cables. Disruption of these chemicals would result in inevitable stirring up of these toxins.  According to LEEDCO, each turbine would contain 404 gallons of industrial lubricants in their gearboxes. 580,000 gallons for 1,450 or 10,000 55 gallon drums of oil out on the lake. Those lubricants need to be changed. Gearbox seals fail, the oil will leak into the Lake below.  Exploding and burning wind turbines are commonplace. When this occurs, there is no way to reach and extinguish them. As turbine blades burn, they create toxic emissions polluting the area below. 1,500 turbines in the lake equals 4,500 fiber carbon blades, up to 250 feet in length each, at risk for toxic pollution in the lake.  Icebreaker’s power cables will be on the floor of the lake, crossing Cleveland’s main shipping channel. Freighters dropping their anchors may run the risk of striking the cable area, just as dragging anchors have hit underwater oil pipelines.

2) Economic Loss to tourism  A view of 480’ industrial wind turbines runs contrary to the beautiful views that many are seeking for their vacations. Picture Lake Erie Shores & Islands trying to sell the view of turbines to tourists.  A recent study by NC State Univ showed that over half of vacationers would not rent a vacation home if wind turbines were in view. The other half would insist on a discounted rate to compensate for the lost view.  How do you estimate the economic loss to businesses dependent on tourism?

3) Loss to waterfront home values  Home buyers pay a premium for location and view. Property values have been shown to decrease where views are diminished by industrial wind farms. Waterfront property owners will see their property values drop when this project is built.  Reduced property values lead to a reduction in tax revenues.

3) Cost to construct and maintain an offshore turbine is 3 to 4 times higher than onshore.  Icebreaker is expected to cost about $126mm to construct, resulting in capacity of 20.7 MWh. The Steel Winds onshore project near Buffalo cost about 25% of that and it generates more power capacity.  Maintenance costs are 3 to 4 times higher offshore. Imagine changing out the lubricants, replacing a gear or blade in high waves or during the winter.

4) Decommissioning and Disposal  The useful life of a turbine is less than 20 years. At which point they must be decommissioned and removed.  California has thousands of industrial wind turbines that were abandoned and are falling apart.  Many of the ’s built in Europe 20 years’ ago will lose their government subsidies in 2020 and a recent article details concern about the lack of funds available to remove the turbines.  Denmark has over 6,000 aging wind turbines, meaning 18,000 aging blades. Their leading business journal states, "A gigantic mountain of scrap blades is building up.... there exists no solution", as they cannot be practically recycled and are too toxic to incinerate.  So who will be stuck footing the bill for the removal of these 1,400 turbines that LEEDCO –Fred Olsen are planning for Lake Erie?

5) doesn’t replace conventional sources of power and does little to reduce CO2  Wind is an unreliable source of power. Wind turbines do not create electricity when the wind isn’t blowing, when the wind speed is too low, when the wind speed is too high, and when they are shut down (feathered) due to breakdowns. You’ll get a sense of that driving between Port Clinton and Willoughby. Roughly 40% to 50% of the turbines are not functioning even on windy days (my observances from traveling those routes weekly over several years).  There is a mismatch between winds ability to supply power during times of . Electric demand is highest during summer months of July & August due to air conditioning use. Those are also the months when wind blows the least. No supply at times of peak demand.  Backup conventional power plants are still required. Nuclear and fossil fuel power plants do not get closed. They must remain available to produce 100% of the power at times when the wind doesn’t blow. They must still be in operation, cycling up & down to match demand, which creates more carbon emissions than if they were allowed to operate at a constant level.  According to data obtained by Denmark's leading business journal, the construction of 6,000 IWTs, fluctuating back up resulted in an actual INCREASE in CO2 emissions, up 36% in one year alone.  A study by Bentek Energy, a Colorado based energy analytics firm, reviewed actual emissions data from four electric generating plants in the Midwest (published in 2011), serving about one third of the U.S. population. They found that sulfur dioxide was not reduced at all and CO2 reduction ranged from only 0.1 ton to 0.3 tons per megawatt-hour.  There’s a big difference between “nameplate capacity” and actual output. Estimates are that actual output ranges from 12% to 35% of the listed nameplate capacity.

6) Ownership: Follow the money  LEEDCO a Cleveland based non-profit that’s been behind this project, will receive $50 million taxpayer subsidy, through 2 DOE grants.  However, LEEDCO has signed an agreement to be purchased by a large foreign multinational company, Fred Olsen Renewables of Norway. Fred Olsen is a large conglomerate that also makes their money through Fred Olsen Energy, which is an Oil & Gas drilling company. So by supporting this project, U.S. taxpayer dollars that were intended to support our goals will wind up going to a foreign company that drills fossil fuels alongside building wind turbines.  The cost per megawatt of electricity generated from Icebreaker will be 3 to 4 times higher than power available through conventional sources. CPP and Cuyahoga County have signed agreements to buy Icebreakers power at a rate not to exceed $181 per megawatt hour plus annual increases. Power this winter was available to purchase at an average cost of $33 per megawatt hour. Fred Olsen has CPP and the county contractually obligated to pay 3 to 4 times more for power than they could be paying.  The US wind industry also receives a federal subsidy called a “production tax credit” that increases their profits. Fred Olsen will receive that subsidy once they take over Icebreaker from LEEDCO.

As Warren Buffett explained: We “get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.”

7) Job losses, not creation LEEDCO is attempting to rationalize the Icebreaker project by claiming that it will create up to “8,000 jobs” in Ohio and will lead to a manufacturing boom in Northeast Ohio. They have rounded up local Union workers to voice their support for the project, implying that it will put thousands to work. Here are the facts:  The turbines that Fred Olsen Renewables will install are Mitsubishi Heavy Industries turbines, manufactured by in their factories in Denmark.  The Block Island offshore wind farm (5 turbines) only created about 300 temporary jobs The Steel Winds onshore wind farm near Buffalo (14 turbines) created about 300 temporary jobs and only 5 permanent jobs.  Because of the specialized nature of installing these European-built turbines, most of the jobs went to experienced European-based installers. They were paid by their European employers and the taxes benefited their home countries.  The facts show that higher wind energy electric costs have actually led to losses in manufacturing jobs in other parts of North America. Manufacturers facing higher electric rates from green mandates, have moved their facilities to parts of the country with lower electric costs, just as labor intensive manufacturers have moved to parts of the country with lower labor costs. a. Estimates of 75,000 to 300,000 job losses in Ontario doe to the Green Energy Act. Heinz Foods moved a food processing facility from Ontario to Ohio; Jaguar closed a plant; Leland Ind’s (fasteners) built new manufacturing facility in Chicago, all to escape Ontario’s electric costs that resulted from higher wind power electric costs. b. Due to the higher mainland electric costs resulting from the new Block Island offshore wind farm, Toray Plastics the largest manufacturer in RI was going to see a $7mm increase in electric costs, threatening 600 jobs. The State had to give them $15mm to build their own electric generator, just to get electric costs down to a competitive level.

The facts show that very few permanent jobs have ever been created by these type of projects. And very little of the resulting income taxes flow back to support our local economy. Yet our tax dollars are paying for the projects. Projects that are profiting the European developers and manufacturers, more than U.S. taxpayers.

8) Ohio’s Public Trust Doctrine The land under Lake Erie is owned by the State and is held in trust to benefit its citizens.  There isn’t a proven public “need” for this project. We have abundant sources. is plentiful and available at a much lower cost.  Fred Olsen a foreign conglomerate, will become the new owner and developer of Icebreaker. They will benefit by receiving a $50mm DOE grant to build the project, ongoing Production Tax Credits (another taxpayer subsidy) and they’ll also benefit by selling the power back to us for 3 to 4 times the going available rate.  Ohio’s citizens are not benefiting in any way from this project.