Princeton wind turbines losing money
Municipal Light Dept. still in the black
PRINCETON — The dual wind turbines that were supposed to save residents of this town money by producing locally generated electricity have actually been losing money, according to a light department official.
Brian Allen, who has been general manager of the Princeton Municipal Light Department since October of last year, reported in a letter to ratepayers that an analysis of the light department's financials reveals that the two turbines, which were installed in 2009, have lost ratepayers $1.875 million since they went online.
Despite the losses, the light department reported a profit of $451,000 in 2011.
The financial losses associated with the turbines are caused by a variety of factors, including a mechanical breakdown of one turbine, greater than projected expenses and lower than expected electricity production.
The turbines were expected to produce 9,000 megawatt hours of electricity each year. Actual production has been closer to 6,500 megawatt hours.
One of the turbines was offline from August 2011 until July of this year, which limited production. Further, while the light department had a three-year warranty on the turbines, disputes between the manufacturer and installation contractor have left PMLD fronting the repair costs and seeking recovery in court.
Because of the costs associated with purchasing, installing and running the turbines, the light department has also been unable to make investments into infrastructure.
The turbines are part of the reason town ratepayers pay some of the highest electricity rates in the state. In 2011, Princeton residents paid an average $173 for 1,000 kilowatts of power; only Unitil ($191) and NStar ($176) charged more.
Mr. Allen said he and the board of light commissioners are looking to see if another utility would be interested in purchasing the power and the associated costs of the turbines.
Brian Allen, who has been general manager of the Princeton Municipal Light Department since October of last year, reported in a letter to ratepayers that an analysis of the light department's financials reveals that the two turbines, which were installed in 2009, have lost ratepayers $1.875 million since they went online.
Despite the losses, the light department reported a profit of $451,000 in 2011.
The financial losses associated with the turbines are caused by a variety of factors, including a mechanical breakdown of one turbine, greater than projected expenses and lower than expected electricity production.
The turbines were expected to produce 9,000 megawatt hours of electricity each year. Actual production has been closer to 6,500 megawatt hours.
One of the turbines was offline from August 2011 until July of this year, which limited production. Further, while the light department had a three-year warranty on the turbines, disputes between the manufacturer and installation contractor have left PMLD fronting the repair costs and seeking recovery in court.
Because of the costs associated with purchasing, installing and running the turbines, the light department has also been unable to make investments into infrastructure.
The turbines are part of the reason town ratepayers pay some of the highest electricity rates in the state. In 2011, Princeton residents paid an average $173 for 1,000 kilowatts of power; only Unitil ($191) and NStar ($176) charged more.
Mr. Allen said he and the board of light commissioners are looking to see if another utility would be interested in purchasing the power and the associated costs of the turbines.
Thanks,
If wind turbines made economic sense, private enterpise would be driving this technology. Like the Chevy Volt, wind turbine producers cannot survive without government subsidies.
ReplyDeleteThere are places where wind turbines make sense. Those places are mapped by the DOE. Central Massachusetts is not a prime location.
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/wind/resource_assessment_characterization.html
If you can't find wind on the side of a mountain, you are not going to find it in a hole behind the high school. Looks like all of the companies that built these things, and the ones that installed them, covered their asses by giving short term warranties, leaving guess who, {the rate payer} to hold the bag. It seems like the municipal light companies in the area could band together and get some help to recover costs. It seems that the Princeston Municipal Light Co., is not afraid to be honest with its rate payers. I have a friend who has a saying, "What is, is." Hiding or being evasive, does nothing but breed distrust. If you have done your best, and it did not work out, you have nothing to be ashamed of Bev.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion this project may be the result of Ch93 Acts of 2000. As a distraction the wind turbine project was worth its weight in gold. Instead of focusing on the illegality of combining the water and light department by using municipal funds for a ballot election we as a town were all atwitter with the new project.
ReplyDeleteAudit due in october till then we can only guess how much it costs us to run or not run ours!Julie has asked and asked for the audit time and time again.I've been there when she asks,If we don't get it we need to ask to get the 8,000. dollars back that we paid to get it done!
ReplyDeletewe need more people to show up for tlwp meetings and ask and ask again and again and demand answers, nothing was said about web site,lower rates for low income and basicly no followup on prior meetings about other question put to the comissioners/board.
shareholder/part owner, like some of you!
I think if they ignore the taxpayers that attend the meetings, don't answer questions that were asked, then we will get fed up and stop going. Well, we have to prove them wrong. This is not their light and water department! They may think so, but they are wrong. I have heard thru the grapevine, that when Mr. Spring asked to see their budget for the next year, our favorite person , Mr. Driscoll, told Will it was none of his business!! Man, what doesn't this guy understand ? It is his business ! This guy needs to learn the hard way! It is not their little fifedom. Bev.
DeleteI asked for the audit of the wind turbine for a number of reasons. I believe you need the actual cost of the turbine to determine the "payback period". You need the actual cost of the turbine to establish a depreciation schedule. An audit should provide that information.
ReplyDeleteAs for subsidies, green energy projects (wind, solar...not so much hydro) are heavily subsidized. As is just about everything I can think of is subsidized by taxpayer money including oil ,coal, nuclear energy, the banking industry...
I want the turbine to be successful. We have dedicated this turbine in honor of someone important to our community. I made the motion to name the turbine in honor of John LeClerc. I was on school committee when we dedicated the high school gym in honor of Elinor Putnam. I don't take these actions lightly.
I also strongly believe in accountability. I want the audit for the wind turbine we will know where we stand.
I am positive that the turbine in Templeton is the same exact piece of crap that Princeton has been having problems with . and I do know for a fact that Shaun Hamilton knew at the time { before we took delivery } that the manufacturer was going belly up . Well Shaun whats the plan NOW !!! O ya you left us for another town . I hope the turbine looked good on your job app.
ReplyDelete