Gearbox FAILURE Investigation

 TMLWP meeting was very well attended on March 12^th. This blog will cover only the “Light” portion of the meeting.

Templeton Wind Turbine Cost Certification – We were informed, after months of delay, that the accountant from Braver FINALLY has the documents needed from MMWEC in order to produce a cost certification for the wind turbine. Discussion was had about the benefit of a presentation of the information at a later date.

The TMLWP website is operational. It needs to be linked to the Town website.

Reclosers – two reclosers have been purchased from Thomas & Betts to replace the defunct reclosers. They should arrive in 6-8 weeks. The only operational failure to the distribution system occurred Hurricane Sandy.

The Commissioners voted the $150,000 PILOT payment to the town to be paid in December. Thank you!

2012 Financial Audit – will be conducted by Braver and will include the two actuarial studies on OPEB liability. Braver will work with Goulet Associates to audit the coop-(MMLDWECC)

Information on this Coop should be listed on the new website.

2013 Electric Rate Study – The Light department will conduct a rate study, which has not been performed in a few years. There have been rate changes, but no formal rate study. This process should take about a year to complete and will consider the possibility of certain discounts for seniors and others.

Customer Comments & Questions –

Steve Drury presented information about Chapter 164 s 1 F, which is quite lengthy and outlines the discounts for the poor (impoverished) and the elderly. Mr. Drury asked if the TMLWP were audited by the DPU. One commissioner welcomed the DPU to look through the books. The manager informed the audience that TMLWP does not have an equivalent R4 rate like National Grid for the poor. The early payment discount is the only discount currently in place. Discounts may change based upon the rate study.

Wind Turbine Discussion- The audience was informed that an inspection of the turbine would be performed by JaKe(Jahnel Kestermann, Germany) this Friday to try to pinpoint the cause of the previously reported “clunking” noise. A different boroscope will be used for the inspection.

A question was asked “Why do we have this turbine and not one from GE?”

Response: The turbine projected began in 2003. Originally, the Templeton turbine was included in the bid through MMWEC for the 10 turbines that are part of the Berkshire Wind Coop. At the last minute, GE would not sell TMLWP(or MMLDWECC) a turbine due to the location of our turbine. GE changed the setback requirement to adjacent buildings from 600 feet to 1,300 feet because of concern over “ice throw”. Ice throw is a condition where ice built up on the blades is flung at high velocity when the turbine spins. Our turbine is closer than 1,300 feet to existing structures, including homes.

The audience was assured that ice throw would never happen with our AAER turbine, because the software would shut the turbine down when ice conditions occur.

There was some discussion about flicker and complaints about  our turbine. To date, only one complaint about flicker has been received.  A resident from Fern St. attended the meeting.

This resident described an incident where he woke up one morning and his deck was cover in ice. He could hear it hitting his roof during the night. In his opinion, the only place the ice could have come from was the turbine.

Later in the discussion Dave Smart handed the manager and commissioners the following report:

Portsmouth RI Gearbox Failure Investigation

Portsmouth RI Gearbox Failure Investigation

This investigation/report was written by DARoberts, LLC from Seattle Washington.

Read the footnotes. Start with footnote 1. …five similar AAER 1500-77 wind turbines with identical gearboxes were installed in the United States1

1 Barstow, CA (1, operating at 1000kW peak output due to grid limitations), Tehachapi, CA (2), Templeton, MA (1)

Templeton’s turbine has an identical gearbox as the one in Portsmouth RI(1), Barstow, CA(1), Tehachapi, CA (2).

Pretty confident this report will be summarily dismissed because it was obtained from the Internet. But if our gearbox is one of the 5 identical gearboxes, and if our turbine now has metal pieces in the oil, wouldn’t it be wise to at least review the report?

The discussion ended with a questions about the certification of this gearbox from AAER. Hopefully, documentation about the certification will be forthcoming from the TMLWP. From what I remember, I think AAER provided a certification of the turbine, but not from Germanischer Lloyd.

The turbine does have a 2 million dollar liability coverage or it may the coop (MMLDWECC) which carries the coverage. The warranty has expired.

When asked directly if it is a good idea to fix the turbine? Is it safe? Is it lucrative? The manager stated “Yes, it is”. The turbine is owned by MMWEC. TMLWP purchases the output from Coop. It is a rather convoluted setup.

Concerns –

Cost certification – how much did the entire turbine cost?  No one will know until the cost certification is complete. Can’t determine the payback period or depreciation without that information.

Gearbox failure – there are differences in maintenance  between Portsmouth, RI turbine and our turbine. After reading the Gearbox Failure Investigation, maintenance or lack thereof is not the cause of the gearbox failure. It appears to be a design flaw that was exacerbated by larger blades than recommended. Larger blades = more output…until the gearbox fails.

This situation bears close attention.

My opinions…supported by FACTS ! ! !

Julie Farrell