Aviation safety, endangered wildlife win Fairview appeal

In January 2014, John Terry, the lawyer for the well-funded wind power development lobbyist the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) told the panel of judges in an Ontario court at the appeal of a decision at Ostrander Point, that their decision was very important for the future of wind power development in Ontario because, he said, “This [a successful appeal] was never supposed to happen.”

One might think that he meant the approval process was so rigorous that wind power projects should pose no danger to the environment or to people and that’s why “this,” the successful Ostrander appeal shouldn’t have happened. But no, what he meant was, the rules and procedures attached to wind power development were supposed to be so iron-clad that mere citizens acting on behalf of the environment, wildlife and their own health, could have no hope of success. Lawyers acting for appellants have said, the test set up by Regulation 359-09 to prove serious harm to human health and serious and irreversible harm to wildlife was impossible to meet.

Except, now, that test has been met.

Four times.

The successful appeals at Ostrander Point, White Pines, Settlers Landing and yesterday, Clearview, show that when proper attention is paid to the requirements to preserve the environment and actually balance development against potential harm, the wind power developments can be demonstrated to be in the complete wrong place.

But the wind power development industry, coached and encouraged by their huge lobbyist and the very compliant Ontario government, felt entitled to propose wind power projects wherever they found willing landowners. Such was the case at Clearview where the eight, 500-foot turbines were to be located near not one, but two aerodromes, the Collingwood Regional Airport and a private airstrip. WPD Canada felt so entitled to success and money that it believed it could locate huge turbines even where pilots’ safety would be in danger and where wildlife would almost certainly be killed.

The Environmental Review Tribunal decision was released Friday, October 7: yes, there would be serious harm to human health because of the risk to aviation safety and yes, there would be serious and irreversible harm to the endangered Little Brown Bat.

Paragraphs [149-151] are interesting: the appellants’ expert witness arguments were “informed and reasoned” the panel wrote, finding they had established “the evidentiary base to support their qualitative assessments.”

Although a remedy hearing is possible, the Tribunal expressed doubts as to the effectiveness of any measures proposed.

The Tribunal used very strong language in places in the decision, saying “it would be trite to say …” or “it is obvious …” and they noted the federal Ministry of Transport’s carefully crafted opinion letter on aviation safety at the airport.

The people of Ontario have despaired at times as wind power projects have been put in fragile environments, too close to people’s homes and workplaces, without any real demonstration of environmental benefit. Millions have been spent by ordinary citizens as they took on corporate Big Wind to defend—what? The environment against their own Ministry of the Environment.

One lawyer for the Ministry has often been heard to say “wind trumps everything.” She is wrong, as this latest decision demonstrates.

Actions taken in the name of preserving the environment must really do that, and not rely on ideology-based trite statements for justification. Ontario has still never done a cost-benefit analysis on its wind power program even though clearly, wind power has a high impact on the natural environment, on communities, and on the economy, without actual demonstrated benefits.

Clearview was a victory for all Ontario, and the environment.

Jane Wilson

(Volunteer) President

Wind Concerns Ontario

Comments

Ron Hartlen
Reply

And let’s continue to communicate and hammer home the point, to all Ontarians, that Ontario’s wind power contributed essentially nothing to getting Ontario off Coal.
And now that the Premier is talking about high Electricity costs, and taking our money out of one pocket to transfer to our other pocket, let’s make sure she knows that the high prices are her fault. When she took power she had an opportunity to put a stop to it all; she didn’t; so now she, not McGuinty, owns responsibility for the mess.

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Here here Ron Hartlen!!!!…. the fact that there is NO ONE responsible for this mess makes me even more furious!!!!! 30 wind company donations to the liberal party equated to 30 contracts to be awarded to those companies by the liberals…. if you did not donate them you did not get a contract…. sounds about as slimey as it can get…. these companies have taken our electrical operators hostage. … I would even call it a terrorist takeover of our system by greedy multinational companies!!!! And who shall be responsible for this happening…..
NO ONE!!!

sommer
Reply

Yes, indeed, the reality that the Ministry of the Environment has allowed our environment to be ruined by audible noise, low frequency noise modulations and infrasound radiation is absolutely preposterous.
The people who are suffering adverse health impacts all say the same thing. These frightening and upsetting sensations and effects started happening when the turbines near their homes were turned on. Their homes are no longer safe and they have no control whatsoever over the atmospheric conditions and wind speeds that cause these sensations and effects to occur. This is so wrong!
Knowledge that this has happened and is continuing to happen to innocent people who did not consent to have their lives filled with the distress this causes, should be deeply disturbing to people whose ‘moral compass’ is working. Who in their right mind would choose to have industrial wind turbines harm themselves or the ones they love? No wonder people in rural Ontario where this is happening are ‘at their wits end’. These people need compassionate advocates who are willing to take action on their behalf.

sommer
Reply

Just in case, people don’t know what it’s like for those who are being forced to endure the distress, here’s an email that was sent by someone this morning. This person has sent hundreds of such complaints in the past year and a half…to no avail. It was sent to all in Ontario who are responsible for this situation:

“Hope you are enjoying your Thanksgiving Holiday weekend. We are NOT.

It is Oct. 8, 2016. The wind turbine project owned by…. located in…. is very LOUD and causing HARM.

We were forced to close the windows due to the noise!

It is a cyclical, TONAL SCREECHING noise and it comes through the closed windows and walls!!!!!!

It is like a several trucks screeching their brakes constantly and from most every direction.

This noise was present when I got up at 7:30 AM to let the chickens out of their coop.
It became so irritating by 10 AM that I called the spill hotline.
It is now 12:30 PM and this noise has been occurring for over 5 HOURS!

The wind at 10 AM was 24 km/h from the WEST. The temp. is 12C, 63% R.H. and it is partly cloudy.

I am very agitated and tense, my heart is pounding, I feel like vomiting.

Investigate this as a HEALTH, safety and noise complaint.

The three closest turbines are:

-790 metres
– 860 metres
– 880 metres

My home has 3 turbines closer than 1 km. My home has 7 turbines closer than 1.5 km. My home has 14 turbines closer than 2 km and 17 within 3 km.

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Go fund me page……
Class action lawsuit!!!!!!!
Get it going I’ll put some cash towards that fer sure!!!!!

notinduttondunwich
Reply

The second the government strips your rights you know bad shat is about to happen!!! This removal of our rights to oppose IWT’S is nothing short of a communist run state… I for one shall never forget this move by Dolton McSqeekey!!!! I bet a $100 that pig gets a prepaid visa or Mastercard for $5000.00 per month as a payoff for selling Ontarions up the creek without a paddle!!!! Such a crooked system…. until we as Canadians turn the tables on our politicians and make them financially responsible for thier acts we will not see anything change in this country!!!!

Barbara
Reply

Some kind of agreement or settlement was made with a party regarding a water well. Could this mean that other settlements will have to be made as well?

Wells should be tested prior to IWT installations by a certified private company. No water well samples provided to the government or the developers.

Tests could include:

Biological
Chemical
Sediments

Good bet these kinds of records will hold in court.

Barbara
Reply

This will become a situation where rural Ontarians have the well water sample records and neither the government or the developers will have any sample records.

Barbara
Reply

Water analysis is based on a good 100 years of scientific information.

If either the government or developers have water samples, this could end up in a “he-says-she-says” discussion the same as the “noise” issues are today.

And rural Ontarians have had a good ten years of the “noise” issues.

notinduttondunwich
Reply

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/sec.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ontario-to-investigate-advertising-of-trailer-park-boys-inspired-whisky/article32219976/%3fservice=amp?client=ms-android-samsung

Wow Ole Katty Wynnd is gonna investigate this eh!!!! Wonder if she’ll do an investigation into who’s responsible for squander BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of ratepayers and taxpayers dollars on wind and solar!!!! Or investigate why people are getting sick in the IWT’S projects. …. or investigate why ground water in CK is turning to silt…. or investigate why bird and bat populations are disappearing……. or investigate charitable donations from wind companies to the liberals for a wind contract!!!!

Barbara
Reply

Use internet search and enter: Branson + Gore.

Both have been involved/active in Ontario.

Cheryl Gallant, MP
Reply

By Cheryl Gallant, Member of Parliament for Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke October 2016

Energy Poverty Means Pre-Paying

This should be no surprise to who are familiar with the close political party relationship between Ottawa and Toronto.

Federal Agency Measurement Canada is preparing to finalize approval for “pre-pay” hydro meters. This was only a matter of time since the province installed so-called “smart meters” in people’s homes.

The announcement by the Federal Government that the designation of “provisional” specification to a “full” specification follows a public mandate letter recently sent by the Toronto Liberal leader to her Minister of Finance bragging about the Ontario Electricity Support Program (OESP) being part of the federal budget.

What I predicted before the last election is now happening. I predicted that all Canadian taxpayers would end up with part of the bill for Ontario Liberals’ policy disasters. It was predictable because the same policy advisers in Queen’s Park, who wrote the “Greed” Energy Act and fled Toronto, are now hiding in Ottawa as the most senior advisers of the federal Liberal Party. The cozy relationship between the Prime Minister and the Ontario premier is bad for all taxpayers, just as I warned Canadians before the last election.

Implied Consent

Pre-payment meters were given provisional approval before the liberal “Greed” Energy and Employment Act had raised electricity prices. Hydro One had not been sold, nor had the “smart meter” electricity scandal cost electricity consumers over a billion dollars. On the basis of no comments or requests from the public or industry back then, the federal government has assumed “implied consent,” which in their way of thinking gives approval to move full speed ahead.

To picture a pre-payment electricity meter, just think of a parking meter that you load with money in order to park a vehicle. These are popular in third-world countries, particularly where poor people have no access to credit. They enable the power utilities to deny access to a basic necessity without actually having to pull the plug if customers have trouble with bills. It forces the poor household to self-disconnect.

Energy poverty, defined as households that spend more than 10 percent of their income on home energy, affects about one million households in Canada. In Ontario, the lowest income group spends on average 12 or more percent of their income on utilities, while the average Ontarian spends only 4 per cent.

Energy poverty is prevalent among certain types of households, including those with single residents, seniors, children or young adults, renters, and those with a female primary bill-payer. Low-income families and individuals are being forced to choose between heating their homes, buying groceries or paying the rent as the result of increasing utility prices. For many, it is literally a choice between eating and heating.

The vast majority of Canada’s seniors (as well as low-income families) live in older houses, with inadequate insulation in attics, walls and basements. For young families just starting out, while these houses may offer cheaper than-average rent or require lower down payments than more efficient homes, their upkeep is costlier, particularly when forced to use electric heat in Ontario.

Climate change policies raise energy costs. As a rule of thumb, the more the increase in fuel poverty, the greater the rhetoric about “climate change”. Canada had been following a smart policy to lower emissions. With the change in Ottawa and no one to moderate the extremists in Toronto, energy poverty is the new norm.

Canadians still have an opportunity to withhold their “implied consent” to poverty meters. While the federal government has set a January 1st 2017 implementation date for its new policy, you are invited to provide me your thoughts on pre-payment electricity meters. Remember, ‘no comment’ is considered by this government to be a “yes.” The federal government deadline for submissions is October 30, 2016.

Barbara
Reply

Reminds me of the old system in the U.K. where people put money into meters to get/buy heat.

Not a new idea. Just a recycled idea.

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Oh my dog!!!! What next!!! This is out of control!!! Will the new hydro meter take bills only or will it accept the great canadian loonie and twoonies!!!

Barbara
Reply

Re: Severe weather

AMS, Published online Oct.12, 2016

‘Simulated super cells in non-tornadoes and tornado VORTEX2 environments’

Study about conditions for non-tornado and tornadoes in super cell formations.

New study which includes information on wall-clouds and shelf clouds produced in by super cells.

Non-tornado storms can produce tornadoes.

Abstract at: http:dx.doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-16-0226.1

Article itself is pay-walled.

Factors to be considered in airport safety issues? Ontario often has severe weather conditions and weather events.

There is more online about the above study.

Barbara
Reply

This past August, two tornadoes struck the Windsor, ON area where neither U.S. nor Canadian radar systems had detected these tornadoes. However, both radar stations are located over the curvature of the earth from where these tornadoes may have originated. Canadian radar picked up these tornadoes but not before several minutes had passed

No weather warnings had been issued in either country as this was considered to be an “ordinary” thunderstorm and not large area of coverage. Don’t know if U.S.radar also picked these up a bit later.

Possible lower level tornado formation from an “ordinary” thunderstorm. No super cell appeared to be present in this situation?

Tornadoes can form so quickly they escape present radar detection.

Barbara
Reply

Weather radar loops take 15 minutes.

So a tornado can form touch down and not be detected by radar. Short duration tornadoes. Later radar analysis can locate the probable location of where a tornado formed along with damage trail information.

This information is already known.

Leave a comment

name*

email* (not published)

website