at the Citizen Power Alliance 2010 Wind Conference
Officials need to answer questions regarding 'Green Wyoming' claims
|Officials need to answer questions regarding 'Green Wyoming' claims|
After reading the Batavia Daily News report, Working to build a 'Green Wyoming', we have some questions we hope Wyoming County Economic Development Director, Jim Daly, can answer for all of us.
Mr. Daly said, “We’ve been discussing starting a ‘Green Wyoming’… The goal is cheaper electric rates for county residents and businesses… The savings would be generated by renewable energy."
We are sure Mr. Daly will understand our difficulty buying in on these claims, considering the fact that Wyoming County has been developing ‘renewables’ off the backs of taxpayers and ratepayers for more than a decade now. Meanwhile, our electric rates have continued to climb and New York State has maintained some of the highest rates in the nation.
We are hoping Mr. Daly and our Wyoming County leaders could share with all of us the research and the cost-benefit analysis -- derived from the experience of others long-invested in the pursuit of 'renewables' worldwide -- that they have done to verify their specious claims? (See: Renewables In Europe Average 16 Times More Expensive Than Gas-Fired Power: http://tinyurl.com/qbavw7y )
We are also wondering if Mr. Daly understands the complete contradiction contained with his claim that someone can “…generate 100 percent of all their electric," while he flippantly admitted they still have to “…use the regular power grid…" when their favored, unreliable ‘renewable’ source is missing in action?
Do Mr. Daly and Wyoming County officials understand that it is all the rest of us who get to foot the bill for this redundant, Politically-correct power? (see: http://tinyurl.com/kybm93k )?
We are wondering if Wyoming County officials understand that solar energy is probably the absolute worst energy source to propose for cloudy New York State – unavailable at night and on cloudy days (which is well over half of the year here in WNY), and with an awful Capacity Factor of around 10%? (See: Dear Northeast, How’s that solar working out for ya? http://tinyurl.com/oey3q99 )
Do County officials have any idea how much has already been spent on unreliable ‘renewables’ to date, which is contributing to our $18 TRILLION dollar debt? (See: $TRILLIONS Spent: Zero CO2 Abated: http://tinyurl.com/pppt3tz )
To be clear, no one objects to 'green' energy per se, as long as those pursuing it are using their OWN money to do so. Yet, what New York State officials continue to perpetuate is a system of robbing Peter to pay Paul. The rich can afford to buy in on these ‘green’ energy sources du jour, while those who cannot afford to, get to shoulder the costs.
Taxpayer and ratepayer-funded ‘grants,’ incentives and/or subsidies being handed down from the Obama and Cuomo administrations are what is driving the pursuit of these 'green' schemes. They act only to transfer the wealth from the general population into the pockets of 'renewable' developers who know how to work the system, and the few who can afford their hefty share of 'going green.' The end result will be to continue to "skyrocket electricity rates" -- just as President Obama forewarned his green energy policy would do -- which ultimately hurts the poor the most.
Let’s hope New York State officials wake up before they follow the Pied Piper over the 'green' cliff, and thrust ever more people into "energy poverty" - defined in Europe as being when a person's power bills are over 10% of their income. Too many people are already there.
Tireless advocate for scientifically-sound, reliable, affordable electricity for ALL Americans,
Mary Kay Barton
Think Again, before your liberties are gone with the wind
It has often been said that the “devil is in the details.” Legal language in the “confidentiality contracts” found in the agreements between Industrial Wind LLCs (Limited Liability Corporations) and landowners is the best example of this age-old axiom.
Landowner leases and “good neighbor agreements” entered into with these multi-million-dollar, multi-national corporations NEED a trusted lawyer’s oversight. Besides the fact that wind industry salesmen have never provided any PROOF to back up all of their false and misleading claims, the hot air contained in the legal mumbo-jumbo within their lease agreements is actually nothing less than the signing away of your First Amendment rights. These legal documents are tied to your property forever, even after the property changes hands. Landowners in Wyoming County ended up with liens on their property when one of the wind developers failed to pay contractors.
Verbiage that should send up the red flag on wind leases for massive industrial-scale turbines on your real estate includes the fact that the landowner allows the wind corporation to “go over, under through and across” leased land — oftentimes for a period of 40 years, with the Big Wind LLC having the right of renewal on those leases. Many believe this also jeopardizes mineral rights of the property under contract.
Another hard-to-decipher clause, usually toward the end of the wind lease contract, states that the Big Wind LLC, at their discretion, can alter any condition of the contract. WOW! Really?!? You might as well just hand the deed over now! Over 40 issues involved with these lease agreements can be further researched here: http://www.wiseenergy.org/Energy/Leaseholder.pdf
“Good neighbor agreements” are confidentiality contracts the Big Wind LLC seeks to have “non-participating neighbors” sign, in which you basically forfeit your rights to address the very grievances that Big Wind swears do not exist — problems that ARE occurring nationwide, and around the world.
The negative impacts include, but are not limited to: Noise/infra-sound, shadow flicker, health impacts, resonant ground vibrations, interruption of TV and cell phone frequencies, interference with ham radio and radar signals, destroyed rural heritage and scenic vistas, negatively-impacted property values (see Michael McCann report, www.GreatLakeswindtruth.org), etc. ...
In fact, residents in Wyoming County are now suing Invenergy due to the resulting problems they are stuck dealing with. In Wisconsin, the Board of Health just dubbed Duke Energy’s Shirley Wind Project a “human health hazard,” because so many people are complaining and even abandoning their homes as a result of resulting problems created by the wind factory. There are currently at least 12 lawsuits going on in as many states due to the ill-effects being created by these giant, sprawling wind factories.
Furthermore, if you sign a lease contract with a Big Wind LLC, a clause states that you will promote the company’s product and not say anything derogatory about it, while also agreeing to hold the wind company harmless. This is equivalent to giving up your rights for free speech — a self-imposed “gag-order”! This is why people who have signed wind-leases can not complain about the negative impacts of wind turbines.
For instance, in Wyoming County — during the 2013 wind factory construction phase, an Orangeville cash-cropper signed leases for wind turbines on properties he owned on the other side of Orangeville which were away from his home farm, that had been in the family for generations. He then decided to lease some of his strawberry fields across the street and down the road from his house on Orangeville Center Road. He did not want any wind turbines on his home-farm, where he lived with his wife and three kids. Because the wind company reserves the right to alter the conditions of the contract at their discretion, and since a neighboring landowner who decided not to sign a “good neighbor agreement” which would have allowed the siting of a turbine near their property, the wind company simply moved the turbine to the farmers home-farm — despite his objections. As a result, the access road then had to be switched to the his home-farm side yard, approximately 75 feet away from his house, continuing west and then running between his barn and maple syrup shanty, and right through his kid’s riding arena.
The now-disgruntled wind-leaseholder then consulted his attorney to terminate the lease. He was informed that this fight would cost millions of dollars, and would be close to impossible to win since he had signed their lease agreements. This farmer and his family now have a beautiful view of about a dozen, 430-foot-tall wind turbines, with their 164-foot-long, 11-TON blades whirring overhead at 200 mph at the blade tips, complete with flashing red strobe lights that drive many crazy — including one directly to their west, obscuring a once-beautiful view. (Mind you, turbines being proposed by Apex are to be 570 feet tall — a full 140 feet taller than the monsters littering Wyoming County!)
Of utmost importance, Michael McCann, a certified real estate appraiser from Chicago, licensed in 25 states, and with 30 years experience in dealing with properties located amongst wind projects has detailed a Property Protection Plan that simply makes sense. I would think that wind developer, Apex “Clean” Energy LLC, would be happy to sign and guarantee property values of landowners if they are sure about their claims that resulting problems caused by wind factories supposedly do not exist. Apex has stated on display boards at their “wind-fo-mercials” in Barker and Yates, that these 570-foot-tall industrial wind turbines placed in and around homes and farms in Niagara and Orleans counties, WILL NOT affect your property values. Thus, Apex should more than happy to sign a Property Protection Plan, drawn up by an independent lawyer of the land-owners’ choosing, in order to protect all involved.
“Caveat emptor” — Let the BUYER BEWARE! Think again before you sign your freedom and property rights away ... As the saying goes, “Decide in haste; repent in leisure.”
To join the many disgruntled homeowners and landowners living within the view of this proposed project working to STOP the known negative impacts the development of this Industrial Wind Factory will create, CONTACT: Save Ontario Skylines (S.O.S.) at: (716) 795-3571, or www.GreatLakesWindTruth.org.
Big Wind destroys the environment while providing no net benefit
Sprawling Industrial Wind Factories Destroy the Environment, Community, Personal Health & Property Values - while providing NO Net Benefit
Considering the history of complete and utter civil discord created by Big Wind projects in rural New York State (NYS) communities over the past decade -- and the fact that industrial wind is a net economic and environmental loser -- Orleans & Niagra County residents should be alarmed by Apex’s proposed wind factory.
The Industrial Wind industry was initiated in the U.S. under the pretense that it would significantly reduce CO2 emissions, and thereby help abate Global Warming. Yet, 30 years into subsidizing the building of wind factories off the backs of taxpayers and ratepayers has proven otherwise.
With approximately 250,000 industrial wind turbines installed worldwide today, CO2 emissions have NOT been significantly reduced, nor has a single conventional generation plant been decommissioned anywhere thanks to industrial wind. As Manhattan Institute scholar Robert Bryce said: "Wind Turbines Are Climate-Change Scarecrows."
Industrial wind provides NO Capacity Value (aka: Firm Capacity - specified amounts of power on demand). Thus, wind turbines need constant "shadow capacity" from our reliable, dispatchable baseload generators - that is, if you want to be sure the lights will come on when you flick the switch. Thus, wind generation actually locks us into dependence on fossil fuels, and as Big Wind CEO, Patrick Jenevein candidly admitted, "Consumers end up paying twice for the same product."
Consider this reality:
ONE (1) 450 MW gas-fired Combined Cycle Generating Unit located at New York City (where the power is needed in NYS) - operating at 60% Capacity Factor, would provide more power than all of NYS's 16 installed wind factories combined, at 1/4 of the capital costs -- and would have significantly reduced CO2 emissions and created far more jobs than all those wind farms – without all the added costs (economic, environmental, and civil), and of all the transmission lines that must be added across the state to NYC.
Industrial Wind has proven to be effective only as a tax shelter generator for large corporations in search of increased bottom lines - just as it was originally intended to do by ENRON, the trailblazer for Big Wind in the U.S. As Warren Buffett candidly admitted, “We get tax credits if we build ‘windfarms.’ That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense otherwise.”
Property values are significantly negatively-impacted, as are peoples’ personal health and quality of life by the noise (ie: infrasound), resonant ground vibrations, flashing red lights, shadow flicker, TV interference, etc., that is generated by these giant bird-and-bat-chopping machines. Just ask the citizens of Orangeville in Wyoming County, who are now suing Invenergy for $40 Million dollars! Likewise, the Wisconsin Board of Health recently declared Duke Energy’s wind turbines a "Human Health Hazard."
The fact that American citizens are being assaulted with their own taxpayer and ratepayer money (which is subsidizing the building of these wind factories to the tune of 80% of the total costs), in the name of the failed ‘green’ energy boondoggle of wind is shameful, and simply un-American. Save yourselves, and your community - JUST SAY "NO!" to Big Wind!
Learn more at:
Mary Kay Barton
Millions of Bird & Bats SLAUGHTERED annually by industrial wind - for NO justifiable reason!
FACT: Millions of Bird & Bats SLAUGHTERED annually by industrial wind - for NO justifiable reason!
We’ve all seen them – The typical, wind industry sales pitches that try to deceive people about the massive bird and bat slaughter that is being caused by industrial wind factories worldwide. Like anyone suffering from denial of bad behavior, the wind industry attempts to distract from the avian slaughter industrial wind turbines are causing annually by pointing the finger of blame at other sources of bird and bat deaths. This wind industry propaganda is inaccurate for more than one reason.
The wind industry likes to claim that cars, cats, and buildings kill more birds and bats than wind turbines do. In fact: Cars, cats and buildings do NOT typically kill Bald & Golden Eagles, condors, whooping cranes, and other raptors -- Industrial wind turbines do!
Another fact wind industry salesmen leave out of their purposeful deception is that there are Hundreds of BILLIONS of cars, cats and buildings worldwide. Juxtapose that with the fact that there are only about 250,000 industrial wind turbines worldwide (approximately 45,100 of those are in the USA, according to the American Wind Energy Association - AWEA), and the deception becomes obvious.
Furthermore, those Hundreds of Billions of cars and buildings have greatly improved the quality of life for Hundreds of BILLIONS of people worldwide. It can even be said that cats improve our quality of life since they keep disease-carrying rodents under control.
Industrial wind turbines do exactly the opposite – industrializing and devaluing entire Towns and Counties, and destroying the quality of life for those stuck living TOO CLOSE, while providing - at best - a redundant energy source that can NOT provide reliable, dispatchable baseload power.
Then there is the massive Habitat Fragmentation that the sprawling footprints of industrial wind factories create. Since habitat loss has been cited as the major cause of species decline worldwide, the additional deaths caused by wind factory-created habitat loss is inexcusable, and the exact opposite result true environmentalists espouse to hold dear.
The whole fiasco becomes even more disgusting when you consider the fact that the very reason the wind industry exists is because of their claims that wind power will reduce CO2 emissions. Yet, CO2 emissions have NOT been significantly reduced by industrial wind factories, nor have any conventional power plants been shuttered - anywhere, thanks to wind. The fact is:
Industrial wind turbines are an additive source of bird and bat deaths - for NO justifiable reason!
Industrial wind can NOT replace our reliable, dispatchable baseload generators because wind provides virtually NO Capacity Value, or firm capacity (specified amounts of power on demand). Thus, wind needs constant "shadow capacity" from our reliable generators, to cover for wind's volatile, skittering flux on the grid; and/or to step in when the wind stops blowing, isn't blowing hard enough, or is blowing too hard. Thus, taxpayers and ratepayers are paying twice for the redundant generation provided by these giant "Cuisinarts of the sky" (as a Sierra Club official dubbed wind turbines in a moment of candor).
The fact that President Obama had to sign a special EAGLE-KILL permit law solely for the wind industry, serves to highlight the absolute hypocrisy of wind salesmen and proponents who claim they wish to "save the environment," while purposely working to slaughter our national symbol – the Bald Eagle (along with MILLIONS of other birds and bats annually) -- in the name of this ‘green’ FRAUD.
~ Mary Kay Barton
AGENDA 21: THE END GAME OF WIND AND SOLAR POWER IS TO HAVE ENERGY RATIONING.
More Subsidies for Big Wind
|The Wind Industry says it's cheaper than fossil fuels, then cries for more subsidies|
By Robert Bryce
If anyone needed proof that subsidy-dependent businesses will always seek more subsidies, look no further than the U.S. wind industry. On Wednesday, the wind sector won a vote in the House on a tax bill that includes a one-year extension of the production tax credit (PTC), which gives wind companies 2.3 cents for every kilowatt-hour of electricity they produce. The companies can collect that subsidy for a decade after they are deemed eligible.
The extension of the PTC was part of a bill that contained more than 50 tax breaks and subsidies that will cost taxpayers more than $40 billion. The portion attributable to the wind industry: about $6.3 billion. It appears that the Senate will pass the bill and President Obama will sign it into law. Thus the wind industry, which has been getting subsidies (with a few short interruptions) since 1992, will continue feeding at the trough.
If there was any doubt that the wind industry needs subsidies, look at the statement put out on Tuesday by the American Wind Energy Association, the sector’s main lobbying group. AWEA said that after the PTC expired in 2013, “new wind installations came to a halt, resulting in a 92 percent drop in new wind projects.”
Of course, rent-seeking entities love to claim that their pet projects deserve subsidies because they will create jobs. Indeed, the phrase “create jobs” appears twice in a one-page letter that was sent to leaders of Congress last month imploring them to extend the PTC.
The letter was signed by AWEA and some 450 organizations, including the usual environmental groups — the Sierra Club, Clean Water Action, the National Wildlife Federation, and the Wilderness Society — as well as a host of major corporations. Among them: NextEra Energy, one of the world’s largest wind-energy producers. I wrote about NextEra last year in these pages after the company filed a SLAPP suit in Canada against Ontario anti-wind activist Esther Wrightman. (Here’s a link. Wrightman, by the way, has since moved out of Ontario, and the project she was fighting, NextEra’s Adelaide Wind Energy Centre, has gone forward.) Others that signed the subsidy-seeking letter included Siemens Corporation, E.On, and Nucor Corporation, which is one of America’s biggest steel producers.
AWEA claims that the wind industry supports 73,000 jobs. But how much do those jobs cost taxpayers?
Earlier this year, Susan Combs, the Texas comptroller of public accounts, came up with an estimate. She reported that each wind-related job in the Lone Star State (which has more wind-energy capacity than any other state) costs the state’s taxpayers about $1.7 million.
That’s an increase over what Combs found back in December 2010, when she reported that each wind-related job was costing taxpayers $1.6 million. In an August op-ed published at Economics21, Combs said that “instead of generating jobs and providing a reliable and consistent energy source, wind projects just generate higher costs.”
Perhaps more remarkable than the high cost of wind-energy jobs is the fact that the U.S. is continuing to subsidize wind energy at a time when AWEA itself is claiming major reductions in cost and European countries are slashing those very same subsidies.
In a press release issued last month, the lobby group declared that the cost of wind energy has “dropped by more than half in the last five years.” Furthermore, last month an AWEA spokesperson boasted to the New York Times that some wind projects are “coming in below the cost of even existing generation sources.” That same November 23 story, “Solar and Wind Energy Start to Win on Price vs. Conventional Fuels,” quoted Jonathan Mir, a managing director at the Wall Street firm Lazard, who said that the price of electricity that wind developers need to make money is now “essentially competitive with what would otherwise be had from newly constructed conventional generation.”
Mir and his colleagues at Lazard estimated that production of wind energy, without subsidies, now costs about 3.7 cents per kilowatt-hour, less than what they found for the same amount of electricity produced from natural gas (6.1 cents) and coal (6.6 cents). So if Lazard is correct and it’s cheaper to produce electricity from the wind than from other sources, why does the wind industry need subsidies?
That’s a particularly relevant question given that European countries are slashing subsidies for renewables. In July, Germany reduced subsidies for wind and solar by about 25 percent. On December 2, the Financial Times reported that an offshore wind farm planned for Northern Ireland has been “scrapped” owing to reductions in the subsidies paid for such projects.
To be sure, the ongoing battles over wind projects go far beyond the issue of subsidies. Citizens and environmental groups (commendably among them is the American Bird Conservancy) in the U.S. and Canada and across Europe are fighting wind-energy sprawl based on a variety of concerns, including destruction of scenic landscapes, the turbines’ deadly effect on bats and birds, and the irritating noise they produce.
But it’s the ongoing subsidies that really annoy Lisa Linowes, one of America’s most prominent critics of the wind industry. Linowes, who lives in Lyman, N.H., is the executive director of The WindAction Group as well as the publisher of the website windaction.org. Asked on Thursday about the vote to extend the PTC, she replied, “We thought the Republicans would have the stomach to stop this.”
— Robert Bryce is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. His latest book, Smaller Faster Lighter Denser Cheaper: How Innovation Keeps Proving the Catastrophists Wrong, was published in May by PublicAffairs.
Citizens' plea: End the wind PTC
The fight is on, again, over which tax credits will make the cut in this latest round of extender bills. The House of Representatives just passed HR 5771 which revives dozens of lapsed tax credits totaling $42 billion, including the controversial wind production tax credit (PTC) that expired last year. If approved by the Senate, HR 5771 will reinstate the 22-year old 'temporary' subsidy retroactively for 2014.
Wind proponents argue the 1-year extension is akin to no extension at all. They paint a dire economic picture of curtailed project development, lost jobs and the unraveling of an entire manufacturing sector. A failure to extend the PTC, they claim, will effectively impose an unfair tax on the industry in the form of higher wind prices. Those who oppose the credit are collectively dismissed as Koch-brother sympathizers, a narrative that has worked short term -- after all, it's easy to hate big oil. But the label is flatly false.
The Grassroots Speak
Leading up to the House vote, a grassroots network of thousands (and thousands!) of Americans nationwide quietly signed letters to Congress asking their representatives, and the leadership, to vote 'no' on any extension of the wind PTC. The signers, all regular, main street Americans impacted by the subsidy-driven push for more wind everywhere, hope their voices will be heard past the slick wind-marketing campaigns and paid mouthpieces with access.
They tell a different story as reflected in these excerpts from the letters sent:
Indiana: "Most of the [nearly 3000] Hoosiers who have signed this letter are directly threatened by the choice you will make. We live in the communities impacted by wind development. Many of our local elected officials have passed restrictive ordinances that effectively ban wind development due to the harms to our local economies, property values, health, wildlife and employment. The PTC encourages wind development in inappropriate places – it has fostered a generation of developers who are rewarded for siting turbines on every free acre that has transmission access, no matter who is in the way or how poor the wind resource."
Ohio: "The Production Tax Credit for wind “energy” serves only one purpose: tax avoidance. Wind is subprime power foisted upon rural communities by a predatory industry. Wind will not reduce the country’s carbon footprint. It will not power our factories. It is highly disruptive to the landscape we cherish. It is about tax avoidance – pure and simple. The burden of wind’s costs falls most heavily on those who can least afford to pay.... The signers of this letter are citizens –volunteers not funded by any organization. We are mothers and fathers. We are ratepayers and taxpayers. Unlike [Jonathan] Gruber’s acquiescent Americans, too dumb to understand the ACA, we understand wind energy. We understand it is little more than a dressed up bit of crony capitalism and support comes only at our expense. Speaker Boehner, please help to stop it. Don’t make us continue to pay for it. "
Texas: There is significant concern about the impact of wind energy subsidies on other sources of generation in Texas. ... Your active involvement in helping end the unjustifiable PTC for industrial wind energy is appreciated.
And for New Hampshire, Nebraska, Alabama and other states: "Renewing the PTC would cost billions that our nation simply cannot afford and the negative impacts on our communities, our scenic beauty and wildlife are significant."
Given the vigor in which proponents are pushing for another PTC extension, it's unrealistic to believe the wind industry can survive without the subsidy. Big wind grew up on the tax credit, developed market plans and forecasts that relied on it, and now the wind PTC appears to be a required component of the industry's economics. Warren Buffet recently reminded us that wind investment makes no sense without handouts from taxpayers.
The consequences back home of more federal subsidies for big wind are real. After more than two decades, it's time Congress learns what the public already knows and heeds the plea to pull the plug on this endless subsidy once and for all.
Linowes is executive director of the Windaction Group (windaction.org), an organization that opposes the wind power industry.
DEAD EAGLE DATA
Dead Eagle Data: Buffet/Berkshire/PacifiCorp Don’t Want You to Know (Part 1)By Jim Wiegand -- December 11, 2014 on www.MasterResource.org
“The courts must reject the PacifiCorp request that eagle mortality data be kept confidential and hidden from public scrutiny. Moreover, Congress, the news media, environmental groups, and concerned citizens everywhere must demand that the information be released in its entirety…. Every industry must be treated the same under our endangered species, migratory bird, and other laws.”
For decades wind industry research has been using “studies” that are actually designed to hide the harmful impacts of wind turbines. Industry-related studies on health impacts, declining real estate values, whooping crane surveys, golden eagle surveys, turbines preventing climate change, wind turbine energy potential, and, especially, bird and bat mortality, have all been manipulated through fraudulent data collection methodologies.
These data collection methods have enabled the U.S. wind industry to hide 90% or more of turbine avian and bat mortality, in my estimation, from public view.
Continue reading here:
Sun Edison Buying First Wind Scam
Most people know very little about the true economics in the solar and wind industry. Even less understand the cryptic disclosures in an SEC filing of reports from FERC. Yet the financial inventors are brilliant in concealing the simple business model that is supposed to generate earning from real economic activity. Let’s be generous and report on the public relations announcement, 5 Slides That Show Why SunEdison Bought First Wind. Reading such glowing projections might attract investors into the SunEdison, TerraForm Power Up Solar ETFs.
“SunEdison is among the largest holdings in both the Guggenheim Solar ETFs (TAN ) and the Market Vectors Solar ETF (KWT ), which climbed 5.1% and 3.8% respectively.
These two solar ETFs are alone in giving meaningful weight to TerraForm, SunEdison’s partner “yieldco” that went public in July, according to research firm XTF.”
Are you ready for some government and private sector newspeak? Note the following appears on the website of NREL - a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. - A Deeper Look into Yieldco Structuring.
“A yieldco is a dividend growth-oriented public company, created by a parent company (e.g., SunEdison), that bundles renewable and/or conventional long-term contracted operating assets in order to generate predictable cash flows. Yieldcos allocate cash available for distribution (CAFD) each year or quarter to shareholders in the form of dividends. This investment can be attractive to shareholders because they can expect low-risk returns (or yields) that are projected to increase over time.”
Surely you got that these “yieldco” are even better than derivatives, RIGHT???
Before you call your broker, review a recent edition of the BATR RealPolitik Newsletter on the topic - Another Green Energy Fraud. When Bloomberg announces that SunEdison, TerraForm to Acquire First Wind for $2.4 Billion, they are not disclosing the entire story.
“Expected to close in the first quarter, the purchase will consist of a $1.9 billion upfront payment and $510 million dependent on First Wind completing backlog projects.
TerraForm will add 521 megawatts of First Wind projects to its portfolio under the deal, with 1.6 gigawatts of projects expected to be developed by SunEdison and dropped down into TerraForm in 2016 and 2017, the companies said in the statement.”
The sorted history of First Wind strikes a record of questionable financial dealing, concealed debt obligations, flipping LLC ownership and holding company discrepancies. It came as no surprise that First Winds bizarre attempt to sell off their self proclaimed core projects fell flat. A local Bangor Maine newspaper has taken the lead on real investigative reporting. First Wind sale means end of $333 million partnership with Emera is but one in a series of damaging evidence on the shady business practices of First Wind.
“Ending a partnership challenged twice before state regulators and in court, Nova Scotia-based Emera has sold its interest in a $333 million joint venture with First Wind, which was purchased Monday by a Missouri-based renewable power developer.
Emera announced Monday that it has agreed to sell its interest in Northeast Wind Partners back to First Wind for $223 million.
The deal would end a legal challenge to that partnership, which Houlton Water Co. and a group representing industrial power users argued violated the intent of New England’s deregulation of its electricity market. But that money may be directed at other power generation resources in the region after the completion of the larger deal between First Wind and SunEdison subsidiary TerraForm Power.”
Ask yourself, why would a newly capitalized company want to acquire a debt ridden albatross like First Wind? When SunEdison Spin-Off TerraForm Power Scores Hot IPO came to market, a smell of a Wall Street bailout using another shell public company reeks. Since First Wind failed in their own IPO offering, just maybe a careful examination into the filings of these companies is warranted.
“TerraForm Power Inc. (NASDAQ: TERP), another spin-off from SunEdison Inc. (NYSE: SUNE), offered 20.1 million shares and raised about $500 million in its IPO, valuing the company at around $2.4 billion. SunEdison will retain nearly 95% of the voting power in the company. The IPO’s underwriters have a 30-day option on another 3 million shares.”
Next review the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Forum K-8 #001-36542 for TERRAFORM POWER, INC. and check out the full company description on TERRAFORM POWER, INC. (TERP) IPO.
Selling shares of public companies to pension funds for eventual shorting from the house accounts of underwriting firms is a favorite strategy that if caught, only gets a slap on the wrist.
The lack of disclosure of ALL the debt for projects that cannot even satisfy minimum interest payments must less retiring the actual obligations, is indicative of an industry that is based upon fraud and uncompetitive costs.
Wind proponents want you to believe that Wind Power Forecasting in U.S. Electricity Markets are based upon true figures of literal production that goes into the grid for actual consumer use. Nothing could be further from the truth. Sun Edison is no virgin to the mega corporation ownership game. Having started in 1959 as the Monsanto Electronic Materials Company, a business unit of Monsanto Company, their SEC filing is a wealth of information on connections to the usual suspects behind the renewable energy Wall Street schemes.
Renewal Energy World explains, SunEdison Launches Yieldco to Unearth, Leverage Solar Asset Values, and sure sounds like a lot of financial trickery.
“Here's why SunEdison and the rest of the industry is so keen to pursue new finance options. Back in its 3Q13 financial results SunEdison calculated its current business model of building and selling solar projects yields about $0.74/Watt -- but those assets' true value could jump as high as $1.97/W if the company can find ways to enumerate and apply various methods: lower the cost of capital, apply various underwriting assumptions, and factor in residual value in power purchase agreements. That's a startling 2.6× increase in potential value creation that SunEdison thinks it can unlock, and creating a yieldco structure to attract interest from the broader investor community is a big part of the answer.”
Birds of a feather flock together and care nothing about all the fowl kill is a bad deal for investors and electric rate payers.
James Hall – December 10, 2014
Citizen Speak campaign mailing to your own contact list