CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website
 in the world. Subscribe today!


Clean Power wind turbines

Published on May 10th, 2012 | by Zachary Shahan

4

You Can Support a Huge (102.5-MW) Wind Farm in Wisconsin

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

May 10th, 2012 by Zachary Shahan
 
 
A reader shared this with us on the CleanTechnica Facebook timeline. It’s a petition to support a huge wind farm in Wisconsin. It wasn’t created out of any special attack on the wind farm, it seems, but just proactively to help make sure this important wind farm moves forward through the permitting process. Personally, I love that — proactive citizen involvement is something we need a lot more of in the U.S. (and probably all around the world).

The petition is embedded below, followed by the “About this Petition” text from the Change.org page:

Wind energy is important because it is a clean energy source and does not produce harmful emissions. Renewable energy sources need to increase in numbers in Wisconsin to help Wisconsin become less dependent on foreign energy supplies.

The Highland Wind Project proposes 41 wind turbines in the Town of Forest of the St. Croix County. The $250 million dollar project will generate 102.5 megawatts, or will be able to provide enough electricity for 30,000 homes.

An application from Highland Wind Farm to allow construction has been submitted to the Public Service Commission (PSC) and has been officially stated as ‘complete’ as of March 29, 2012.

This is a huge step forward but the next step is The PSC has 180 days (September 25th, 2012) to review another application known as the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity(CPCN) which is required for the project to be approved.

Let the Town of Forest, St. Croix County, and the State of Wisconsin know that you are aware of this project and that you support this project.

Public Comments can be submitted to the PSC here:

http://psc.wi.gov/apps40/dockets/content/detail.aspx?dockt_id=2535-CE-100

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.

Print Friendly

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

Tags: , , , , , , ,


About the Author

spends most of his time here on CleanTechnica as the director/chief editor. Otherwise, he's probably enthusiastically fulfilling his duties as the director/editor of Solar Love, EV Obsession, Planetsave, or Bikocity. Zach is recognized globally as a solar energy, electric car, and wind energy expert. If you would like him to speak at a related conference or event, connect with him via social media. You can connect with Zach on any popular social networking site you like. Links to all of his main social media profiles are on ZacharyShahan.com.



  • MaineHiker

    shame on you
    Wind Industry Sponsored Online Blogging Alive, Well and Against the Law?
    https://skydrive.live.com/?sc=photos&cid=b6147304a619be64

    Posted by Whetstone_Willy on May 20, 2012 at 10:00am
    Send Message   View Blog
    The next time you read some bald faced pro-wind lies in an online post, consider that the blogger may be employed by an organization that has made this commenting part of his or her job. The employer could be a wind company but also a wind industry law firm, engineering firm, a paid off so called environmental group, an ornithologist who rigs bird studies, etc.
    It is now established fact that many of the pro-wind comments we see in online reader comments are the result of paid bloggers or bloggers otherwise employed by the wind industry or their mercenaries in the paid off environmental organizations.
    The following directives are taken from the Board of Directors of the American Wind Energy Association 11/2/11 meeting materials.
    “Respond quickly to unfavorable articles by posting comments online, using the AWEA blog and twitter, and putting out press releases”.
    ” • Work with Grassroots team to recruit and activate a “Wind Army,” identifying state,    member and third-party surrogates to spread AWEA messages. Results: • Quadrupled size of online community from February to October, building online advocacy list from 25,000 to 113,000; plus LinkedIn at 8,000, Twitter at 12,500,     Facebook at 37,000, for a total online community of more than 172,000 and still     rapidly growing”.
    The PDF can be seen here:
    http://www.coalitionforsensiblesiting.com/doc/AWEAPolicyDoc-Nov2011
    I believe that this sort of paid blogging without disclosure may be illegal. Please see the red colored font below:
    For Release: 10/05/2009
    FTC Publishes Final Guides Governing Endorsements, Testimonials
    Changes Affect Testimonial Advertisements, Bloggers, Celebrity Endorsements
    The Federal Trade Commission today announced that it has approved final revisions to the guidance it gives to advertisers on how to keep their endorsement and testimonial ads in line with the FTC Act.
    The notice incorporates several changes to the FTC’s Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, which address endorsements by consumers, experts, organizations, and celebrities, as well as the disclosure of important connections between advertisers and endorsers. The Guides were last updated in 1980.
    Thank you, Whetstone Willy
    Under the revised Guides, advertisements that feature a consumer and convey his or her experience with a product or service as typical when that is not the case will be required to clearly disclose the results that consumers can generally expect. In contrast to the 1980 version of the Guides – which allowed advertisers to describe unusual results in a testimonial as long as they included a disclaimer such as “results not typical” – the revised Guides no longer contain this safe harbor.
    The revised Guides also add new examples to illustrate the long standing principle that “material connections” (sometimes payments or free products) between advertisers and endorsers – connections that consumers would not expect – must be disclosed. These examples address what constitutes an endorsement when the message is conveyed by bloggers or other “word-of-mouth” marketers. The revised Guides specify that while decisions will be reached on a case-by-case basis, the post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service. Likewise, if a company refers in an advertisement to the findings of a research organization that conducted research sponsored by the company, the advertisement must disclose the connection between the advertiser and the research organization. And a paid endorsement – like any other advertisement – is deceptive if it makes false or misleading claims.
    Celebrity endorsers also are addressed in the revised Guides. While the 1980 Guides did not explicitly state that endorsers as well as advertisers could be liable under the FTC Act for statements they make in an endorsement, the revised Guides reflect Commission case law and clearly state that both advertisers and endorsers may be liable for false or unsubstantiated claims made in an endorsement – or for failure to disclose material connections between the advertiser and endorsers. The revised Guides also make it clear that celebrities have a duty to disclose their relationships with advertisers when making endorsements outside the context of traditional ads, such as on talk shows or in social media.
    The Guides are administrative interpretations of the law intended to help advertisers comply with the Federal Trade Commission Act; they are not binding law themselves. In any law enforcement action challenging the allegedly deceptive use of testimonials or endorsements, the Commission would have the burden of proving that the challenged conduct violates the FTC Act.
    The Commission vote approving issuance of the Federal Register notice detailing the changes was 4-0. The notice will be published in the Federal Register shortly, and is available now on the FTC’s Web site as a link to this press release. Copies also are available from the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580.
    The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,700 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics.
    MEDIA CONTACT:
    Betsy Lordan
    Office of Public Affairs
    202-326-3707
    STAFF CONTACT:
    Richard Cleland
    Bureau of Consumer Protection 
    202-326-3088
    (FTC File No. P034520)

  • Luke

    What a fantastic idea! I would sign, but I live in NZ. :-(

    • Hope

      This. U.K.

    • http://cleantechnica.com/ Zachary Shahan

      Think you can sign anyway, no?

Back to Top ↑