Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Decommissioning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge pause on Marathon County wind project, raise decommissioning, battery and wildlife concerns
Summary
Multiple residents urged a temporary moratorium and called for stronger decommissioning assurances, inflation‑adjusted financial guarantees, wildlife buffers and clear public review for any future battery storage additions to the Hub City wind project.
Public commenters at the Marathon County Alternative Energy Project Local Impact Advisory Committee meeting urged the county to slow the process and adopt stronger protections before negotiating development agreements with wind developers.
Wendy Bowski told the committee the engagement process appeared to be largely developed before the advisory group could provide meaningful input and asked the developer, Alliant, to state on the record whether battery energy storage systems (BESS) would be added in the future only after a separate public review process and explicit approval by the Public Service Commission. "Will the company commit that no battery energy storage system will be added to the Hub City wind project without a separate public review process and explicit approval by the Public Service Commission?" Bowski asked.
Cindy Nelson voiced concern about utility‑scale battery storage safety and emergency response, saying household backup batteries are not comparable to utility storage and warning that fires at large battery installations can produce toxic smoke and require large-scale evacuation planning.
An unnamed speaker cited third‑party reports on decommissioning costs, saying Minnesota project data show removal and restoration estimates of roughly $410,000–$532,000 per turbine and urging the county to require full‑value financial assurances (inflation adjustments, no salvage credits, and clear abandonment triggers) to prevent taxpayers or future landowners from inheriting cleanup liabilities.
Joe Kiwak and other residents urged a temporary moratorium — a pause to study noise, shadow flicker, groundwater, wildlife impacts, road damage, emergency response needs and long‑term decommissioning obligations — before the county negotiates joint development agreements. Several commenters said counties elsewhere now require posted decommissioning bonds or other financial assurances and suggested Marathon County should adopt comparable protections or tailor provisions from its existing metallic mining ordinance (Chapter 17.204) for compensation funds and road repairs.
What the committee said: staff said they will forward technical and decommissioning questions to the developer for the June 25 meeting and noted that, if a joint development agreement is pursued, the county intends to use outside counsel to draft and negotiate the specialized language. No formal moratorium was proposed or enacted at this meeting.
Next steps: staff will compile public questions for Alliant and seek written confirmations where possible (such as whether a resident hotline will be provided), the committee will review Alliant responses on June 25, and members will continue to collect issues to inform possible JDA language.
