Wind Energy Project Open House This Evening

Tuesday, November 30, 1999 12:00 AM

Prince George, B.C. - A proposed wind energy project is up for discussion at Buckhorn Elementary School this evening. Fred.Olsen Renewables is a company based in the U.K which wants to build a wind energy plant on Mount George.

The project is entering the environmental assessment stage.

Natural Power Consultants, acting on behalf of Fred.Olsen Renewables, will hold the open house on the project which is designed to create 250 megawatts of power or enough to power 300 homes.

The plan calls for up to 50 wind turbines to be installed on the site, which is south east of Prince George. The environmental assessment phase will take at least a year to complete. The proponents are hoping that if all the approvals are granted, they could start construction in late 2009.

The open house is to get underway at 6 this evening.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 1999 12:00 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Andyfreeze on April 8 2008 7:17 AM

Clean power...go for it!

Posted by: robichal on April 8 2008 7:25 AM

this is good news - sure beats the poop out of the ridiculous bio energy garbage idea. I suppose the major and his councillors will nix this...it is sure time for an election - good bye kinsley!

Posted by: metalman on April 8 2008 7:26 AM

Not pretty to look at, and blamed for bird deaths, but still, we need clean power, and the wind is possibly the best alternative to hydroelectric generation.
metalman.

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on April 8 2008 7:39 AM

I wonder if that is the same location as George Mountain?

There have been small wind turbines on George Mountain for decades, I saw three turbines there this winter.

Or maybe they are talking about Mount Tabor??

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on April 8 2008 8:14 AM

High purity levoglucosan is obtained from pyrolysis oil derived from cellulose ... extracting the powder residue with ethyl acetate to provide a levoglucosan-rich...

Owl says "...BTW, if that (bio-mass) plant gets built there it will increase the levels of levoclucosan in the area, the trace element being used to determine particulates from biomass burning (cellulose)..."

It is levoglucosan, not levoclucosan. It will be interesting to see what big bad words can be used to scare people about wind power!

Posted by: Bridge on April 8 2008 10:23 AM

I want site "c". These guys are just peeing around. Wind power is a clean alternative but power for 300 homes means we could have the entire province covered to meet the American needs.

Sure we would loose some agricultural land with site C but we will probably be using it to grow crops for ethanol for our gas guzzeling vehiles.

Cheers

Posted by: He speaks on April 8 2008 10:31 AM

Sure, maybe we can chop up some birds when they fly over it. splat splat splat.

Posted by: diplomat on April 8 2008 12:35 PM

If 250 mega(!)watts could power only 300 homes I would venture to say that each house would have the world's largest grow-op in it!

It should probably read -just a guess- 300,000 homes!

Posted by: diplomat on April 8 2008 1:13 PM

Correction:

"The world�s largest wind turbine is now the Enercon E-126. It will most likely produce 7+ megawatts (or 20 million kilowatt hours per year). That�s enough to power about 5,000 households of four in Europe. A quick US calculation would be 938 kwh per home per month, 12 months, that�s 11,256 kwh per year per house. That�s 1776 American homes on one wind turbine."

7 megawatts (20 million kilowatt hours per year) = close to 2,000 homes. 250 million kilowatt hours per year would be roughly enough to power about 30,000 homes per year.

The *300 homes per year* information must be as incorrect as was my earlier stab in the dark with 300,000.

Posted by: Eagleone on April 8 2008 6:53 PM

I agree the 300 homes is wrong. The turbines my uncle sells for Acciona can power about 150 homes per unit offsetting about 2000 tons of carbon each year. So I would have to say those numbers in this article are suspect if these turbines are anything like the ones in the Southern Alberta wind parks. Each of his turbines costs anywhere from $1.5 to $3 million a piece.

Posted by: lunarbase on April 8 2008 7:40 PM

The reason for the low numbers quoted is the wind power is not firm power ( no wind no power ) and therefore is hard for Hydro to plan on that power, so it has to be backed up with Hydro / water power or some other reliable source.

Besides the bird issues, for people living near them there is noise factor and also a strobe scope effect that while you are standing in your yard it affects the light.