Ann Arbor officials will consider wind options to meet city's new renewable energy goals
(This story has been updated will comment from Mayor John Hieftje.)
Ann Arbor has set a new goal: Cut greenhouse gas emissions from municipal operations in half by 2015, and have 30 percent of the city's energy needs met by renewable sources.
Lofty? Maybe, but that's the idea.
Andrew Brix, the city of Ann Arbor's energy programs manager, will be busy helping the city meet its energy goals over the next four years.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
The Ann Arbor City Council voted unanimously this week to direct city staff to continue to develop and implement plans to increase renewable energy use and reduce greenhouse gas emissions — both in municipal operations and throughout the community.
The council also directed staff to conduct an evaluation of options to purchase long-term, fixed-rate renewable electricity from wind turbines constructed in Michigan.
"Ann Arbor's energy program saves money for taxpayers and we can prove that over and over again," said Mayor John Hieftje. "The same thing would hold true for wind energy from the Lake Huron coast. If the numbers don't work, the city wont do it. Simple."
The council-approved resolution sets revised "energy challenge" goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in municipal operations by 50 percent — and in the community by 8 percent — from 2000 levels. It also includes the 30 percent renewable goal by 2015, with the added hope that 5 percent of all energy needs in the community will be met by renewable sources by then.
The city recently met the city's previous goal from 2006 of having 20 percent of energy use for municipal operations coming from renewable sources by 2010. That's up from about 15 percent when the city started the energy challenge.
The renewable figure is a collective measure of the city's performance in the areas of electricity, natural gas and transportation. Just looking at electricity, the city hit 32 percent last year.
"While there are numerous compelling environmental benefits to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing our use of renewable energy sources, the current economic downturn presents additional financial reasons to pursue these goals," Andrew Brix, the city's energy programs manager, wrote in a memo to the City Council.
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing renewable energy use means reducing the city's use of fossil fuels, which Brix said has a number of benefits:
- Reducing the city's expenditures on electricity, natural gas and motor fuel used in municipal operations, which totaled $5.2 million in fiscal year 2009-10.
- Most of the money spent on fossil fuel energy sources — more than $300 million each year throughout the Ann Arbor community — leaves Michigan, so reducing these expenses keeps money in the local economy.
- Energy efficiency and renewable energy projects tend to employ local contractors, creating jobs, and the money saved through reduced energy bills helps to keep workers employed.
Brix said the city's energy office staff has begun monitoring communitywide renewable energy use and greenhouse gas emissions on an annual basis to understand what programs are necessary at the community level. He said staff has reviewed data on city and community energy use and suggested measures that, if implemented, would lead to meeting both the greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy goals.
Key programs include a renewable electricity purchase for municipal facilities, increased use of renewable fuel in the community, and deployment of a community energy program for residential and commercial buildings. Brix said staff should continue to explore the Energy Commission's recommendations and consider other technologies and partnerships.
"By committing to a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 8 percent for the Ann Arbor community by 2015," he said, "city staff can continue to develop the local programs and form the community partnerships necessary to assist Ann Arbor businesses and homeowners toward sustainable energy use and also point the way for other communities in Michigan to follow."
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's e-mail newsletters.
Comments
deb
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 2:13 p.m.
Hieftje, instead of saying you can prove it, just prove it. we want the numbers. Not a U of M buisness study that shows us what COULD happen
deb
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 1:36 p.m.
This sounds like were becoming a energy prospector. Their are tow outcomes either prices go up in the next few years and it lets us pay less for energy or prices come down and were paying a high rate. I am not sure what will happen, but with high prices and the beginning of the summer season I would guess that prices would be down after the summer . . .
utownie
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 9:53 a.m.
The city already spent money investigating a wind turbine on the north side of town. Ask how much they spent on that boondoggle and who was paid. What is happening with that? Also how much time was spent by city staff on that project. DTE is already building wind energy into their system that ALL DTE customers will pay to support the additional cost. This was mandated at the state level several years ago. When the city of Ann Arbor pays the additional cost for their own wind plus the DTE wind, finding the money will be easy -- layoff some more essential service providers like police or fire, but do not layoff the energy or environmental people! Just how many are there? Create an income tax. Raise taxes...what's the problem?
NoSUVforMe
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 12:52 a.m.
Thank goodness we have an enlightened council and mayor doing good work, including focusing on renewable energy. I always wonder where the ideologues on this board get their misinformation. They make claims on this board without ever providing attribution for they sources. Then, it always comes to me.. They make it up to support their twisted view of reality. If we want ideological, uninformed tripe, we can invite Rush LImbaugh - chief provider of misinformation for the conservative agenda. Of course, these ideologues discount the countless climatologists that have spent their lives studying about and now warn about anthropogenic global warming. And they know more than the climatologists!!! How do I know... because they say so!!! I wish I could channel the mercury, arsenic, and other poisons from burning fossil fuels directly into the children and grandchildren of these ideologues. The ones that insist on burning fossil fuels should pay the price, not people that care about the Earth with good motives and brains. Happy Earth Day. Earth is the only place we have and it would be a tragedy of monumental proportions to destroy it for future generations.
jcj
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 12:29 a.m.
@Andrew Brix You give some figures as to what is spent on fossil fuels, but I don't see the figures on your cost to us the cost of the study,the cost of "wind options" or the savings to us.
Nick
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 7:54 p.m.
Science deniers, take a look at this: <a href="http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney?page=1" rel='nofollow'>http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney?page=1</a>
deb
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 2:15 p.m.
It actually dosent, because there is not enough supply of wind powered energy. If you were to do supply and demand of clean energy, because of the low levels of it, then the price would be above that of regular energy.
SillyTree
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 10:43 p.m.
Also, if the thumb is in desire of this wind generated energy, as you suggest, and we have a demand for it as well; this demand should generate more production. Or doesn't supply and demand work with alternatives?
SillyTree
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 10:40 p.m.
Craig, So if one plus one is two, and I have one instead of you they still don't add up? If wind power is replacing fossil fuels, it is replacing fossil fuels. Where it replaces them is immaterial.
Craig Lounsbury
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 8:44 p.m.
Nick, take a look at this..... The wind turbines in the thumb don't remotely supply the electrical needs of the thumb area. So if we buy wind generated electricity for Ann Arbor it will be replaced in the thumb with something other than wind powered electricity. Hypothetically if the electricity generated from a wind turbine in the thumb was sent to Ann Arbor instead of being used in the thumb it will lose some "punch" through resistance in the lines. So a megawatt of power leaving the windmill powered generator in the thumb won't quite be a megawatt by the time it gets here. Its more efficient and cleaner to use it there until such time as they have all the wind powered electricity they can possibly use with surplus to send elsewhere.
RayA2
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 6:44 p.m.
Thank you city hall for setting an example and leading the way toward a better Michigan, especially for our children. With the attacks coming from Lansing and the ignorance of environmental issues promoted by Rupert Murdoch, RepublicKlans, and oil companies we need more beacons of light like you.
L. C. Burgundy
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 6:49 p.m.
I agree. When I'm receiving my 3 hours of electricity per day from windmills, I'll remember how much worse off we were when we had a reliable supply of electricity, the single biggest reason we have a modern society.
grye
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 6:14 p.m.
I think I'll try to sell the city on an underground solar array. Think of the energy savings we'll have when there is no electricity to use.
deb
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 6:11 p.m.
The city could cut energy costs by not running the new water fountain. . . .
lester88
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 1:23 p.m.
Tim should starting using "WE" instead of "THEY." it's quite obvious.
deb
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 8:28 p.m.
They didnt and they have shown no plans too. I can give you a lot of could do's also
deb
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 8 p.m.
tim every single one of your comments in every article you have ever commented on is in support of city council. I find this suspicious, do you just agree with every single decision the city council makes?
Tim Darton
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 7:30 p.m.
That fountain is part of the storm water recycling system and they could run it off solar. By the way, it does not take a penny away from the cities ability to pay salaries, etc.
Macabre Sunset
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 5:32 p.m.
This is what happens when party bosses know that there's no risk of running a candidate who won't win. There's no accountability. These people are more interested in what's going on in Arizona than they are in Ann Arbor's future. Let the energy companies solve the energy problems. Unless council members are qualified to build wind farms themselves (and clean up all the broken birds unlucky enough to live near them), this is not a wise use of their time or our money.
L. C. Burgundy
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 4:56 p.m.
"By committing to a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 8 percent for the Ann Arbor community by 2015," Nothing like setting a goal won't even have a theoretical effect on, well, anything. Just more of the city doing a little Kabuki environmental dance while there are potholes that destroy wheels right in front of where I work. Glad to see they have their priorities straight on saving the earth while ignoring the actual infrastructure. But hey, it's not like they sat police officers in a radon-filled cesspit for decades while preening about their environmental accomplishments. Right?
Kai Petainen
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 4:50 p.m.
on top of the VA hospital is a wind turbine, and usually when i drive by, it's not moving. <a href="http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2008/12/ann_arbor_veteran_affairs_hosp.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2008/12/ann_arbor_veteran_affairs_hosp.html</a> it's not obvious to me, that the wind turbine has been a success. great idea for the environment, but i don't think it can be done well in ann arbor.
xmo
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 4:37 p.m.
" Reducing the city's expenditures on electricity, natural gas and motor fuel used in municipal operations, which totaled $5.2 million in fiscal year 2009-10." If it costs more, can we fire him and the rest of the city staff who voted for this "Voodoo Energy" Policy? We are in 2011, why don't we use science/business to determine our energy policy!
Kai Petainen
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 3:36 p.m.
there's a little yellow area on this map near ann arbor. not sure where that is exactly, but perhaps that's a spot to use? <a href="http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/images/windmaps/mi_80m.jpg" rel='nofollow'>http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/images/windmaps/mi_80m.jpg</a>
KJMClark
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 2:50 p.m.
I think you may be reading that scale wrong. It looks to me like most of Ann Arbor is better than the yellow.
FrankieD
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 3:35 p.m.
Just have the city council hooked up to hoses and there is enough hot air to power the city and to increase the temperature in town. Oops, global warming!
Awakened
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 3:22 p.m.
Getting rid of all those police cars and fire trucks after the layoffs will be a big benefit to Ann Arbor's environment. Go Green Mayor!!!
Craig Lounsbury
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 3:04 p.m.
Buying wind generated electricity from the thumb is pointless in a "think green" perspective. Until those wind turbines produce enough electricity to feed the needs of the thumb area and everybody between us and the thumb with room to spare all we do is divert "clean energy" from one place to another. The thumb isn't rolling in surplus unused wind powered electricity is it?
sbbuilder
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2:55 p.m.
Business are constantly on the lookout for ways to save money. If there was even a smidgen of a chance that " ... the money saved through reduced energy bills helps to keep workers employed", a business would be all over it. I don't see business flocking to this ideal. Even with the few that do, often there is a hefty government subsidy involved. The truth, my friends, is that economically THIS MAKES NO SENSE. 1) How long will it take for the cost 'savings' to pay for themselves? 2) What is the cost per unit energy for conversion? 3) Why are we looking at solar in a state where the sun hardly shines? 4) Why are we looking at wind in a state where the wind is erratic at best? 5) If we are truly serious about greenhouse gas emissions, why aren't we committing to nuclear? These council members have proven themselves abysmally poor stewards of our money.
KJMClark
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 2:43 p.m.
1) Government is *not* a business. 2) Businesses ignore externalities every chance they get. 3) The cost savings depend on unknowable estimates of future energy costs. 4) The cost savings depend on how long we ignore greenhouse gas emissions as an economic problem. 5) Nuclear has significant economic problems (like insurance, and waste disposal). 6) The financial industry considers Ann Arbor one of the best run cities in the state. Council has been doing a much better job of managing money that our private banking and automotive industries.
G. Orwell
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2:43 p.m.
"Ann Arbor's energy program is forward looking and it puts conservation first. It has saved the city millions of $$$ over the last few years. Their LED street light program is the best. " Are you sure about that? What was the cost of upgrading all the existing lights with LED lights? It had to have been several million dollars. Did the cost justify the energy savings? Could that money have been used more effectively? I am all for reducing fossil fuels to reduce our reliance on foreign oil (what most people do not know is that U.S. has more oil than Saudi Arabia which our government and oil industry will not tap into for geopolitical reasons) and real pollution. But, the whole green movement has been hijacked to line the pockets of a few wealthy people. Lies about sea level rising "20 feet" to scare the public into submission. It is all about money and control. Unfortunately, AA seems to be playing right into it.
jrm.jr
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 10:07 p.m.
seems to me the "wealthy" are the only ones willing/able to invest in these things.
thinker
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2:24 p.m.
The "bucket of city money that can't be used" for more important things is coming from my taxes! From ME, the tax payer! Don't be so dishonest as to pretend it does not come from us! My city taxes and appraisal went up this year! Grants come from US, the tax payer. Use any "buckets of money" you have for essential services, and lower our taxes!
Kai Petainen
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2:21 p.m.
As much as I'm in favor of environmental matters and I love the idea of wind energy... Look at this map.... and Ann Arbor is a poor location for wind. <a href="http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/images/windmaps/mi_50m_800.jpg" rel='nofollow'>http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/images/windmaps/mi_50m_800.jpg</a> But... if it's about purchasing wind power from other areas of Michigan / Ontario ... then that sounds like a great idea.
Tim Darton
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 7:28 p.m.
They are looking about buying power from the wind fields in the Thumb and it is correct that over long distances some is lost but not the way this would work. A2 would pay a little extra for DDT's wind energy but the same kilowatts that go on the system would not be what comes to A2. Those would be used in the Thumb area, A2 would get whatever the grid has to offer but it would all work out.
Kai Petainen
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 3:33 p.m.
sb... excellent point. sucky about losing power, but excellent point.
sbbuilder
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 3:05 p.m.
Kai Excellent map. The problem with purchasing power from distant sources is the loss from transmission, which is substantial. <a href="http://www.bsharp.org/physics/transmission" rel='nofollow'>http://www.bsharp.org/physics/transmission</a> Up to 30% is lost over long distances. That does not take into consideration loss through substation power step-down, or local transformers. Ideally, with this type of electrical production, you want to locate the source as close as possible to the point of use. From the map, you can readily see that there are no locally ideal areas for wind generation.
Tim Darton
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2 p.m.
Ann Arbor's energy program is forward looking and it puts conservation first. It has saved the city millions of $$$ over the last few years. Their LED street light program is the best. Wind in the right place, like Michigan's Thumb, is cheaper to install than new coal. DTE and Consumers are both investing heavily in the Thumb. And as someone said, this bucket of city money could not be used to pay for firefighters or police anyway.
deb
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:41 p.m.
cause we dont shift money around in the buckets through accounting procedures . . . . "What she's proposing is to move forestry operations out of the general fund and into the stormwater utility fund for a savings of $659,798 to the general fund. Some forestry expenses would remain in the general fund – expenses associated with past retirees, for example. Moving forestry to the stormwater utility would include the elimination of two vacant full-time positions, and a strategy of contracting out services like tree trimming, planting, and stump removal. Tree planting levels would be maintained, McCormick assured the council. [Previously. the city has paid for some stump grinding activity out of the stormwater fund.]" <a href="http://annarborchronicle.com/2011/03/04/ann-arbor-2012-budget-trees-trash-streets/" rel='nofollow'>http://annarborchronicle.com/2011/03/04/ann-arbor-2012-budget-trees-trash-streets/</a> . . . wait we do.
deb
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:30 p.m.
Millions????? "McCormick pointed out to the council that an upcoming meeting agenda included an item authorizing an expenditure to buy LED fixtures for those city-owned streetlights that have not already been converted to lower energy fixtures. [The March 7, 2011 agenda item shows 500 LED cobra head fixtures at a cost of $315,968.] Anticipated energy and maintenance savings from installation is expected to be $32,000 in FY 2012 and $47,000 in FY 2013." or that dte is paying it back as you claim. <a href="http://annarborchronicle.com/2011/03/04/ann-arbor-2012-budget-trees-trash-streets/" rel='nofollow'>http://annarborchronicle.com/2011/03/04/ann-arbor-2012-budget-trees-trash-streets/</a>
deb
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 3:49 p.m.
kjm: when i do use facts i post links. What link am i supposed to post when asking others about facts? If you look up above you will notice how many things I point out that dont have factual backing. Above someone said that the led lights paid for themselves in three years, but thats not the truth. There was a study that said that could happen not that it dit
KJMClark
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 2:38 p.m.
Deb - "when i post facts i try to give some links to the info" Sorry, but your name isn't ringing any bells as one of the posters who put up frequent links. Going back through several pages of your comments, I see an awful lot of asking other posters to provide links, but only one that you provided, a link to a MI law. Maybe you could watch the insinuations and just say you don't agree?
deb
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 1:33 p.m.
tim every single one of your comments in every article you have ever commented on is in support of city council. I find this suspicious, do you just agree with every single decision the city council makes?
deb
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 1:33 p.m.
tim when i post facts i try to give some links to the info. maybe you can try to do the same. instead of saying that the program paid for itself, why not say that a study said the program could pay for itself. by not saying that you are misleading people.
lester88
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 1:18 p.m.
Amazing! Tim Darton has the exact same talking points as the Mayor.
Tim Darton
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 8:40 p.m.
The facts right? You are kidding right?
deb
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 8:15 p.m.
note where?
Tim Darton
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 8:14 p.m.
A2 Politico? You are far gone if you are looking for truth there.
Tim Darton
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 8:13 p.m.
Yes, I think A2 is a well run city. fewer cuts than other cities and they have not raised the millage. Ever look at the Free Press or Mlive Statewide? Have you seen the cuts other cities have made or the big tax increases last year in GR and the big one coming up in Lansing? Lansing is set to lay off 160 in police and fire if it doesn't pass and 75 if it does. Same size city as A2. So much of what people complain about here is just wrong. For instance, people ignore the realities of government finances. The "bucket" theory isn't a theory. They can't take money from a lot of the silos it's in. Like the fountain sculpture, it does not affect how much the city can pay for the PD or FD and yet people here ignore the stories Stanton writes that say that. Also Deb, note here that DTE has fixed the metering problem
deb
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 7:42 p.m.
im still not sure the city has saved millions from energy conservation over the past 15 years. And once again the lights haven't actually saved us any money on our electric bill. they have decreased the amount of electricity we use to power the street lights but not any actual savings on the bill. if anything we saved dte money or increased their profits on that particular contract. The only true savings was in maintenance in that the led bulbs last longer then the older bulbs.
Tim Darton
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 7:25 p.m.
You have a point Deb: I should have said the city has saved millions from conservation over the last 15 years or so, they had a sign up in the old lobby by the elevators. But I was also trying to illustrate that the energy program won a couple of million in grants the last year. They are spending it on the LED's, so that will save money for a long, long time and also solar hot water for the buildings and refurbishing one of the systems they have at the pools. All of the outdoor pools are now heated via solar.
deb
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 6:09 p.m.
Millions? Really, Millions? that seems very made up. There is no way it has saved the city millions The led street light program didnt save us any money because street lights are unmetered, dte charged a flat rate to the city for street lamps, we didnt get a cut in our bill and didnt save any money. There is now legislation that will require power companies to set rates for led street lamps. The main thing led street lamps save cost on is the maintenance.
G. Orwell
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 1:40 p.m.
What greenhouse gas is Brix talking about. I am assuming the EVIL CO2 which plants need to grow. CO2 only makes up .0384% of all greenhouse gases. What benefit do we arrive at by reducing this gas? At what cost? This whole renewable energy thing is getting ridiculous. Just insulate the buildings and conserve energy. Far cheaper and sensible. Wind energy is probably the least practicle source of energy when you look at cost. DON'T DO IT! I wonder who stands to benefit.
cibachrome
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 1:37 p.m.
Livingston County has done a wind and a solar energy augmentation project and its in place and working. Solar outperforms wind 2:1.
logo
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 1:35 p.m.
People: The energy program SAVES taxpayers money, A2 is a leader in the U.S. in energy conservation. They don't want to put wind mills here, they want to buy energy from the new wind mills being installed in Michigan's Thumb. They would pay a fixed rate for the energy on a long term contract, pay a little more now and win big later. This would also earn them green credits to trade. (The $$ would not come from the general fund anyway so no effect on the police or fire depts.) A2's LED street light program pays for itself in less than three years and on top of that they won grants so it starts to pay back immediately. I was appointed to the energy commission by the previous mayor, wish I had time to do it again. They are doing good work.
deb
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:30 p.m.
whoops shoulda read that closer. However it dosent appear to pay for itself in three years
deb
Sat, Apr 23, 2011 : 5:29 p.m.
NOT A MENTION OF ENERGY SAVINGS "McCormick pointed out to the council that an upcoming meeting agenda included an item authorizing an expenditure to buy LED fixtures for those city-owned streetlights that have not already been converted to lower energy fixtures. [The March 7, 2011 agenda item shows 500 LED cobra head fixtures at a cost of $315,968.] Anticipated energy and maintenance savings from installation is expected to be $32,000 in FY 2012 and $47,000 in FY 2013." or that dte is paying it back as you claim. <a href="http://annarborchronicle.com/2011/03/04/ann-arbor-2012-budget-trees-trash-streets/" rel='nofollow'>http://annarborchronicle.com/2011/03/04/ann-arbor-2012-budget-trees-trash-streets/</a>
Tim Darton
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 8:43 p.m.
I think he is referring to the study of the LED program done by the UM business school.
deb
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 8:11 p.m.
really i didnt think they had yet. additionally, where did you come up with program paying for itself in three years?
Tim Darton
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 8:02 p.m.
Deb; That was a problem at first but DTE is paying back now. You are correct, there is a big payoff in maintenance.
deb
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 6:14 p.m.
Wasn't the saveings on maintenance because dte couldn't meter the lights
5c0++ H4d13y
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2:28 p.m.
Yea they are putting in LED lights at my local park by ripping out the perfectly functional ones there already. It looks ver cost effective. Meanwhile we can't get kids to school on the bus.
thinker
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2:20 p.m.
Who pays for the grants? I can't afford it!
5c0++ H4d13y
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 1:28 p.m.
Please don't waste money on this.
thinker
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 1:26 p.m.
I vote for a new mayor and new council. This is a boondoggle and they know it! The only wind in this part of Michigan is City Hall. We need a new US Representative that will focus on saving our country and not awarding money for questionable green projects. We need a new US Senator who will focus on saving our country and balancing the budget instead of running on a platform of preventing Canadian garbage coming to Michigan. ( I agree that IS reprehensible, but our problems are greater!) We need to drill our own oil so we can be independent of foreign sources and keep the price of gasoline lower. We need to balance our budget as any household does who has spent more than they have taken in. Concentrate on the priorities, major and council. You can be replaced.
outdoor6709
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 1:22 p.m.
I did not realize Disney was building a theme park in AA. As I sit here looking out the window at a no wind day. I have two proposals which will end this nonsense forever. Anyone who supports wind energy should be required to disconnect from the grid and rely on wind energy only. Second any city offical/politician that supports wind energy should have the windmill located within 1000 feet of their home. please read about problems created by windmills in Mi and Pa. <a href="http://www.wvmcre.org/neg_imapcts/noise.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.wvmcre.org/neg_imapcts/noise.htm</a> Windmill efficency is never as high as sold by well meaning "salespeople/politicians. <a href="http://www.energyadvocate.com/fw91.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.energyadvocate.com/fw91.htm</a> My guess AA will have windmills soon because fantasy always wins over reality in Disneyland.
Mr. Ed
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 1:09 p.m.
My thought as well regarding all the hot air blowing around Ann Arbor City Hall.
JSA
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 12:50 p.m.
I no longer live in Ann Arbor but I have to ask myself, "how did these jokers get elected?" I only used to ask that about Detroit and its politicians. No longer.
KJMClark
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 12:49 p.m.
I'm *really* happy the city is doing this. I would hope, however, while they're looking at buying power from wind generation, that they also account for line losses (the best wind resources in Michigan are in the UP, along Lake Michigan, and in the thumb). Then I hope they seriously re-evaluate using our other two dams for power, and using biomass cogeneration.
redhead74
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 12:46 p.m.
Let's see. City Council doesn't have enough money to fund fire and police, fix our embarrassing roads, fund our city parks. They have to keep robbing from the DDA (who seems to be able to manage thier money) to make ends meet. They took 20 years to decide that the old City Hall needed to be rebuilt while allowing the people we depend on most to work in an appalling atmosphere. They have negociated contracts that are bankrupting the city. But gee, let's pay some new consultants hundreds of thousands of dollars to study putting wind turbines up. Let's make more bike paths that are only used for 5 months out of the year (I have not seen one bike on the new Stadium paths-they are all on the sidewalks). I have had enough of this mayor and this council. They are not working for the citizen's hard earned dollars. As the old AA News would say..."Dump the Dopes!"
Bogie
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 12:46 p.m.
Funny. I won't pretend I live in A2,(also, I am very new to the area) but there is something, that has perplexed me. Sitting in Belleville, ypsi township, and (I think) the city of Ann Arbor, are hydroelectric dams. Why don't we use them? It is sad. We pay for energy managers, when there seems to be a very viable answer to this problem. If for any reason, why wouldn't these municipalities want to make a little money, to offset budget shortfalls? It seems, no matter the subject, that the local communities here perform countless studies, that are worth millions of dollars. The study is performed, people get paid, and nothing changes. It is fundamental problem found in many communities, and the reason, I find myself on the opposing side of most "green" arguments. Hey Ann Arbor.com. I would love to see an investigative story, on why we don't use our county's (minus Belleville) existing hydroelectric dams?
grye
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 12:36 p.m.
I'd be interested in know the return on investment and how long it will take to recoup the initial cost for the units.
Brad
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 12:33 p.m.
No problem. Just put an itty-bitty hydroelectric plant in the fountain outside city hall. You gotta have your priorities.
braggslaw
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 12:22 p.m.
conservation makes sense...use less wind? let's see what it costs.
Soothslayer
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 12:22 p.m.
Wind, from where? Just point the turbines toward City Council and can power the county!
andys
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 12:22 p.m.
With all the major challenges society is facing this is complete folly. In five years we will be looking back shaking our heads at what our officials were thinking.
Diagenes
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 11:14 a.m.
Its ironic that politicians would consider generating electricity from wind. There is an abundance of it coming from city hall.
Craig Lounsbury
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 10:56 a.m.
Maybe the renewable energy paychecks can look in to some sort of energy producing treadmills. We could line them up in the mold/asbestos/radon riddled basement of city hall and put all the laid off policemen firemen and teachers on them.
Craig Lounsbury
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 10:52 a.m.
"Numerous tests conducted in the basement of city hall over the years showed radon levels far above amounts considered acceptable by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency." "there were dozens of buckets and trays in the ceiling above where police worked to catch rain that leaked through a promenade into the first floor of city hall." ""You couldn't walk down the steps without water you believe is sewer water dripping on you or slipping on it, and you walk into the bathrooms and they stunk so bad." Meanwhile up in council chambers.... "The City Council this week directed staff to conduct an evaluation of options to purchase long-term, fixed-rate renewable electricity from wind turbines" "the city's energy office staff has begun monitoring communitywide renewable energy use and greenhouse gas emissions..."