Staff Writer

The Saco wind turbine whirred to life Monday morning, a week after the city council voted to move forward with selling the unit for $130,000.

The turbine, which sits atop York Hill next to the train station, was still for three months because of a loose part. Councilors who supported selling the turbine said it has fallen short of expectations and the city will have to pay for all maintenance because the company that sold the unit has gone bankrupt.

City Administrator Richard Michaud said Jim Heath, former CEO of Entegrity Wind Systems, will be an agent for the resale of the turbine. Heath told city councilors he believes he can sell the unit for $130,000 within the next year.

The city council retained the right to refuse the sale. Councilors Eric Cote, Margaret Mills and Les Smith voted against selling the wind turbine.

The wind turbine was put online in February 2008 for $207,000. The contract with Entegrity Wind Systems guaranteed the unit would produce 90,000 kilowatt hours per year, or $12,600 per year in electrical savings.

To date, the unit has measured a kilowatt output of 27,545 hours. This translates to $3,856 of revenue or saved electrical costs.

The contract with Entegrity Wind Systems also stipulated the company was responsible for maintenance, though that agreement ended when the company went bankrupt in 2009. In May, the city paid $2,125 to have the turbine inspected and serviced.

Deputy Public Works Director Howard Carter said he was able to flip the switch to turn the turbine back on after the fairing that sits at the top of the 100-foot monopole was removed last week. There were loose brackets and bolts around the fairing, or shroud, which is not necessary for the unit to function properly.

While Heath looks for a buyer, the wind turbine will remain in use, Michaud said. The cut-in speed – the point at which the turbine blades spin on their own – has been adjusted back to the 10.2 miles per hour recommended by Entegrity Wind Systems.

Michaud said the city previously decreased the cut-in speed to 6 miles per hour because of “numerous” questions and complaints from residents about why the unit did not spin on windy days. The unit had to use electricity to turn with the lower cut-in speed, he said.

Cote said the cut-in speed and lack of accurate information about the amount of energy actually produced are two reasons he thinks the city should hold off on selling the unit. The city should look more closely at the amount of electricity produced now that the cut-in speed is different and the fairing removed, he said.

Cote said he also objects to another councilor’s characterization of the wind turbine as dangerous. Councilor Marston Lovell said during a workshop earlier this month that his research shows large wind turbines should not be located in populated areas.

“The chances of a telephone pole falling are far greater than a wind turbine pole falling,” Cote said.

Cote said the city has shown its commitment to being green in other ways, including switching to energy efficient light bulbs and using a smaller wind turbine to generate electricity for the wastewater treatment plant. Still, the city needs to do what it can to use more alternative energy sources, he said.

“The wind and the sun are free. We need to work on that. You have to keep plugging away,” Cote said.

Councilor Jeffrey Christenbury said selling the turbine is a good idea because of the uncertainty of costs in the future and because the current location is not ideal for a wind turbine. Because the maintenance contract is void, the city is now responsible for all work on the unit. While Heath said he could probably provide new blades to make the unit more efficient, Christenbury said it is unclear when that could happen and at what cost to the city.

“I’d rather have the $130,000 in our pocket,” he said. “To me, it was a common sense decision.”

Christenbury said he doubts there  will be any backlash from the community over the sale.