Visitors to www.pauatahanui.com have been asking many constructive questions about the proposal for a Pauatahanui Wind Farm and are looking for information on which to base their opinions. We collated those questions, grouped them and passed them to Chris Drayton of RES for comment. RES are the first wind farm developer to actively propose a development in Pauatahanui although others are believed to have an interest.

Public Awareness and Consultation

Q1. How many people attended the RES Open Day on Saturday 3rd November '07 and what was the general view of those who did? What percentage of those who attended live in Pauatahanui, Whitby or elsewhere?

A1. Our best estimate is between 100 and 120 people. We encouraged people to leave us comments, and 35 forms were left with us. It is difficult to generalise about peoples views, but on a spectrum they ranged from fully supportive to fully opposed. Approximately a third of comments were fully or mainly supportive, a third opposed, and another third were conditional or focussed on acquiring further and better information.

Q2. How many sites globally use the exact same model of turbine proposed for the Pauatahanui Wind Farm and please provide some reference sites so that we can contact and discuss the impact with local communities.

A2. We have not selected a turbine manufacturer or type yet. We know that the model chosen will be between 2 and 3MW output, of the latest design and technology and made by a world leading manufacturer. This size and type of turbine is required to make the most efficient use of the wind resource at Puketiro.

Q3. At what percentage of community opposition would RES consider an alternative location for the Pauatahanui Wind Farm and have you done so at other proposed locations globally?

A3. Puketiro windfarm is an ideal location from nearly every perspective and will make a world class windfarm site. We believe that using a very small percentage of the land for the location of wind turbines is a responsible, environmentally sound and economically prudent decision which will significantly improve the sustainability of the Wellington region. Provided that RES can satisfy itself that the potential adverse effects of the proposal on people and the environment will be properly managed, then the many benefits of the project mean we will be pleased to put it forward for public consultation and, following refinement, for decision under the RMA. We are aware of the issues that some people have raised but there are also many people who support the proposal. We are working to better inform people about the effects and trust that on that we will be able to allay any lingering concerns.

Q4. Does RES have a policy of compensation or mitigation if unforeseen or unexpected health risks, property depreciation or ecological damage is reported after turbines have been installed. If so, how many cases have resulted in compensation and/or mitigation and where?

A4. RES has a policy of meeting or exceeding the requirements of all environmental, health and safety and other laws. The Resource Management Act 1991, District and Regional Plans and other NZ legislation are there to protect the health, wellbeing and amenity of people and communities. We are required to provide full information about the potential effects, and this will be analysed and reviewed by the local authorities and tested in an open and contestable resource consent process. Provided resource consents are granted, conditions will be imposed to ensure that people’s wellbeing and amenity is protected. We will be bound by those conditions and required to monitor our performance against them. RES intends operating the windfarm to ensure compliance at all times. If we were unable to meet those conditions the local authorities and Environment Court have ample powers to ensure compliance.

Q5. Until the open day, over half of Pauatahanui and an even larger percentage of Whitby were unaware of the proposed Pauatahanui Wind Farm, based on a sample survey. With increasing awareness comes an increasing interest in information. Will RES be running other open days as more people get involved? Do you have plans to improve the effectiveness of your marketing to increase awareness?

A5. RES is committed to full and open consultation. We began consultation very early in the project development stage and have already run two public open days, distributed hundreds of newsletters, set up a project website, attended many meetings with residents and representative bodies, and answered many ad hoc enquiries. We are also engaged regularly with all the local resident associations near the site. We are also establishing a regular liaison meeting with stakeholders that will improve the flow and consistency of information to the relevant communities. The resource consent application will of course be fully notified and open to public submissions. We are satisfied that the coverage, effectiveness and public awareness of the project is high but we are always open to possible improvements.

Construction, Technical and Planning

Q6. From the time the first parts arrive on site, how long until the entire wind farm is built and we stop seeing components and construction items being delivered through Pauatahanui? Are turbines assembled one at a time or in groups? Will construction and movement of components and other items happen in the evenings or early mornings? 

A6. Much more specific information about this will become available later in the process when we have identified the access routes to the site, done the necessary engineering and planning work, and understand the constraints and requirements that the site presents. However, based on our previous experience, we would expect to carry out the works over a period of 18 months to 24 months. The installation of the turbines would start only once the connecting roads and foundations are built. We expect turbine installation to take about 6 months. Our current expectation is that turbines would most likely be assembled one at a time. The transport of the large wind turbine components would likely occur during hours of low traffic to reduce disturbance and is a matter for further consultation and assessment.

Q7. You've been recording weather conditions in Pauatahanui for some time as part of your site analysis. How long has this been going on, what percentage of the time has the wind been suitable for power generation and is the weather monitoring setup central to the Pauatahanui Wind Farm location at Puketiro?

A7. RES has been monitoring the wind resource at Puketiro since the beginning of May via instruments on two 80 metre monitoring towers. We also have access to extensive historical wind records obtained from the site by way of a 20 metre mast erected by the Regional Council a few years ago. The wind monitoring has shown that the Puketiro site has a world class wind resource and further resource assessment is ongoing.

Q8. Turbines have a life expectancy of 20 years. How disruptive is the replacement of turbines? Do you only replace a few worn out components, or do you pull them down and build new foundations, essentially starting over again. Will we see turbine components and construction traffic going through the village every 20 years? How long does the 20 year rebuild take to complete?

A8. The expected operational life of the windfarm is 25 years from the date of commissioning. At that time a decision would be made as to whether to refurbish, remove or replace the turbines. If refurbishment or replacement were chosen, the owner would need to go through the planning and RMA approval processes again. As far as possible all the existing infrastructure, including cables, foundations and roads would be reused.

Q9. What model of turbine is planned for the Pauatahanui Wind Farm at Puketiro and where can we get technical documentation?

A9. We have not selected a turbine manufacturer or type yet. We know that the model chosen will be between 2 and 3MW output, of the latest design and technology and made by a world leading manufacturer. Whatever turbine type is chosen, it will need to comply with strict environmental controls, including for noise.

Q10. Will existing power line pylons be upgraded or new pylons installed to take the power away from the Pauatahanui Wind Farm. If so, how is the impact on the community managed, both in terms of construction/upgrade and visual impact?

A10. We are required to meet the grid connection requirements of Transpower, the owner of the national electricity transmission grid. We are working on understanding and then meeting their parameters for the connection of the windfarm. So far it appears that the existing grid has capacity and will not require an upgrade. In terms of connecting from the windfarm to the grid, we expect any new overhead lines to be mounted on poles. If necessary, we will go through the same RMA process as for the other aspects of the windfarm.

Q11. If wind turbine technology improves before the wind farm development starts, will RES use the new technology, or are RES contractually obliged to commit to an agreed turbine model or manufacturer?

A11. RES is not constrained to any manufacturer as long as it is able to meet the conditions of any resource consent it obtains. We will use the technology that best fits the economic, environmental, wind, and other factors relevant to the project. This includes potentially using any new technology that may become available.

Q12. What is the maximum power output that can be generated through future expansion of the proposed Pauatahanui Wind Farm and how many turbines would this require? What are the limiting factors, such as access to the grid or urban boundaries. Would you look at a mix of turbine size and technology to maximise land usage or are you constrained to similar scale turbines for balanced power generation?

A12. RES is considering a project of approximately 50 turbines with an output of 2 to 3 MW each across the infrastructure zone shown on our newsletters and website. It has no plans to expand the windfarm. Any expansion would require a new consent process and this is not part of the proposal.

Q13. When the wind speed is too high and the turbines shutdown, does the wind passing a fixed object make more or less noise than when the turbine is running and providing less wind resistance? Do they still turn to face the wind to reduce the noise and any vibration output when the wind is turbulent?

A13. At low wind speeds the sound generated by wind turbines tends to increase with wind speed. Beyond wind speeds of around 30kph (Beaufort force 5) the wind turbine sound remains constant. However, the background noise generated by the wind passing through trees, vegetation, and obstructions continues to increase and the background noise masks out the wind turbines. So at moderate to high wind speeds the sound of the wind turbines is not audible over the background noise.

Q14. Modern wind farm planning tools such as visualisation software allows accurate views to be created from any point in a 3D world. Does RES use advanced planning tools and if so, why has RES been unable to show the visual impact of the turbines to residents who have asked for them?

A14. RES uses a full suite of modern software tools. This includes ‘wireline’ images of a preliminary layout that were portrayed to people at the open day on 3 November. As far as visual impact is concerned, the highly detailed and realistic photographic montages of the type displayed at the open day and posted on our website are, in our opinion and our professional advisors opinion, the best, most accurate and effective means of allowing people to understand what the windfarm will look like. We intend to pursue this approach for the visual assessment for Puketiro. When we have a preferred layout we will be in a position to produce a lot more information about what the windfarm will look like. Residents will obtain a very clear understanding of the way the windfarm will look once we have firmed up the project details.

Q15. Although the final locations may change, can RES provide accurate GPS coordinates and height information for each proposed turbine so that residents can assess visual and other impacts themselves.

A15. When we have determined a firm layout for the windfarm, an indicative location for each of the turbines will become available. In terms of their effects, we suggest that the work RES will do with respect to the potential effect of noise, visual and other impacts will be more than adequate to obtain a clear understanding of the effects of the proposal. That material will also be reviewed and tested by the Councils’ own experts so people should be confident that it is the best available source of accurate information.

Q16. Some wind farms around the world have been decommissioned. Have RES had to decommission any sites globally? If there was an unforeseen reason why RES had to decommission the Pauatahanui Wind Farm, how would RES ensure the character of the area was restored and all trace of the turbines including the concrete foundations and power line infrastructure removed? Is this built as a contingency into the business model?

A16. One advantage of wind power over other forms of energy production is the ease of decommissioning and the simple removal of infrastructure from the site. The windfarm could be easily and rapidly dismantled and the site restored, leaving no visible trace of its existence. Works would involve the removal of all turbine components, transformers, substation, overhead power lines and control building. Cabling would be removed. Subject to consent requirements, some access tracks would be left to provide the benefit of improved farm and forest access for the landowners. The buried concrete foundations would not be removed as this would cause more land disturbance than leaving them in-situ. The foundation would be graded over with soil and revegetated.

Q17. The Pauatahanui Wind Farm would be close to land that is recognised as a potential earthquake hazard. How resilient are the turbines to earthquakes and what frequency and amplitude of vibration can they withstand before toppling over?

A17. Wind turbines are bolted onto very heavy foundations and are subject to dynamic loads during their normal operation which cause movements that are accommodated by their design. Earthquakes will also cause movement but only significantly large earthquakes causing major damage to other structures would be sufficient to damage a wind turbine. 

Q18. Several properties depend on streams that run from the ridgelines where turbines are proposed. What guarantees can RES provide that the supply of fresh water will continue both during and after construction? The volume of concrete required for foundations requires considerable water and tapping these resources would impact on the human and livestock water requirements, as well as the reserves required for fire services as needed.

A18. Information about these streams will be gathered in our geological and hydrological studies. RES will need to consider any potential effect on them as part of our studies. If it appears that windfarm activities may have an adverse effect, we will do whatever is practicable and reasonable to avoid or remedy it. That will also be reflected in resource consent conditions. RES will not allow a situation to occur where the safety of people’s properties is compromised by adverse impacts on the supply of water for fire fighting.

Health Issues

Q19. There has been a growing concern over the affects of Infrasound. What mechanisms do the proposed turbines use to mitigate or minimise Infrasound radiation? What Infrasound measurements are taken by RES pre and post implementation and how?

A19. RES is not aware of any credible scientific link between wind turbine generators and any adverse effects of vibration or ‘infrasound’. There are a number of misleading and unfounded reports available on the internet which suggest that vibration or infrasound could be a health issue. However, we acknowledge that any potential adverse effects on people’s health and wellbeing are required to be addressed under the resource consent process. We will treat any possible evidence to the contrary with an open mind and respond accordingly.

Q20. On your web site you state that RES is not aware of any report that suggests links between wind turbines and public health risks. If we were to provide a selection of reports that do link turbines to public health, would you look to retract your statement, acknowledge the existence of reports and provide a response to the points they raise?

A20. We reiterate our understanding that there is no credible link between wind turbines and public health. However, any potential adverse effects on people’s health and wellbeing are required to be addressed under the resource consent process. We will treat any possible evidence to the contrary with an open mind where it is based on credible scientific method.

Q21. Blade strike, disorientation and habitat disruption are known to affect wildlife, especially birds. What wildlife is most at risk in the Pauatahanui area and how do RES plan to minimise or mitigate these affects.

A21. RES is carrying out a full ecological study, including extensive field work in relation to birds, fish and terrestrial fauna. The work done so far indicates that there are ecological values on or around the site which we need to be mindful of and work to minimise effects on. Detailed investigations into bird life on the site are still in progress and these will include all potentially threatened species. When that work is complete, our proposal will incorporate the results of the investigations and appropriate mitigation strategies. These will be included in our consent application and available for public comment. We will be doing more work and further consultation, including with the Department of Conservation and other parties, to reach a clear understanding of any risks and means to mitigate them.

Benefits

Q22. What local employment opportunities will be created at each stage of the wind farm project through to the operational support phase?

A22. As the project develops we will begin to get a much firmer idea of the potential local input. Based on our experience with other wind farm projects the major opportunities arise during the construction phase, when suitably qualified local and regional firms will be identified and invited to bid for a significant portion of the construction work, on roads, foundations, towers and buildings. Our procurement policy ensures that wherever possible, local contractors and employees are used in the windfarm construction. Construction materials would be sourced from local and regional suppliers, and local transport and plant hire companies would be used wherever possible. Based on other similar projects, a temporary workforce of approximately 40 is likely to be needed during the construction stage. During this period local commercial premises (e.g. cafes, stores, service stations) would benefit from an increase in expenditure but the proximity of other population centres means that the workforce is unlikely to place significant additional demands on infrastructure and services near the site. All interested businesses with appropriate capabilities should contact us to be included on our register of local businesses.

Q23. Although traditional power generation is required to back up the wind farm when the wind is too slow or too fast, will any existing power stations be decommissioned within New Zealand and when is this planned to happen?

A23. Currently most of the flexibility that is used to respond to any variation in the system such as a change in electricity demand or wind output, comes from hydro generation. The existing thermal plants have a limited flexibility which is generally only used to accommodate the morning and evening peaks in electricity demand. We are advised that the only generators that are expected to be retired in the next 10 – 20 years are thermal generators such as Huntly and New Plymouth and that there are no plans at all for the dams to be decommissioned or retired. The retirement of any thermal generators is unlikely to have an adverse impact on the management of wind generators.

 

  

 

Answers received 14.12.2007
Page updated 18.12.2007