Small Wind Disincentives
State and local governments not only provide incentives for the installation of wind turbines and other forms of alternative energy but they sometimes make it difficult, and in extreme cases, nearly impossible for residents to excercise their rights in supporting and promoting clean sources of energy and distributed power generation.
The most egregious obstacles to the installation of wind turbines are often found in local zoning regulations. Many local governments have zoning regulations which severely limit the proper installation of a small wind system. One of the most common limitations are height restrictions. For some obscure reason, zoning officials in these jurisdictions, have come to the conclusion that structures should limited to the height of a two story building. Height restrictions often limit structures to 30 or 35 feet in height. For wind turbines to be economically viable, they must be installed well above obstructions. There are few locations in the U.S. where a turbine could be expected to function properly on less than a 60 foot tower. An overwhelming majority of locations require 80 to 120 foot towers, with 100 feet probably being the most common.
Another common restriction is the so-called "Fall Down Zone". Many regulatory bodies have singled out wind turbine towers as being a type of structure that is uniquely likely to fail. Because of this alleged propensity, it is necessary to install wind turbines at a distance from boundaries equal to, or in some cases, some multiple of the tower height. This latter requirement could be called the "springing theory of structural failure" - the absurd notion that a tower will not only collapse but, in doing so, it is somehow capable of springing off its foundation and heading straight for your neighbor's property. It should be obvious to any rational person that a tower, like any other structure, is engineered by professionals so as not to fail. These same professionals routinely engineer much larger and more complex structures, such as bridges, skyscrapers and aircraft where a failure would have the potential to injure or kill hundreds or thousands of people. If the "fall down zone" requirement were applied to the tall buildings in our major metropolitan areas, commerce as we know it, would soon come to a halt. There is no proven, or even rational, basis for singling out wind turbine towers as the only structure to require a "fall down zone". If municipalities are to require a fall down zone for a turbine tower they should also require it for buildings, flag poles, utility poles, church steeples and as a setback from trees. There is hardly a major storm that goes by when some tree doesn't blow over. However, most zoning regulations do not require trees to be cut down before a habitable structure can be erected within their fall down zone.
As another example, utility interconnection can be so expensive and burdensome that it makes small wind uneconomical. Masachusetts, the home state of Aerostar, has one of the most unfiendly and unsupportive tariffs for small induction wind turbines. Requirements include, special "utility grade" relays, submission of electrical schematics stamped by electrical engineers licensed in the state, substantial application fees and other impedliments. Small, 10 KW induction turbines are treated the same as megawatt sized turbines. NSTAR, one of the utility companies servicing the area has, so far, refused to waive or relax these requirements. The tariff and NSTAR's interpretation of tariff provisions are so burdensome that it can cost $5,000 to $8,000 just to interconnect a small induction wind turbine. This is roughly 1/3 the cost of the turbine! This makes Massachusetts one of the most unfriendly states for small induction wind turbines. This is unfortunate because it denies consumers choice and makes it extremely difficult for those who support distributed power generation to do their part by installing one of our turbines.