Environment Canada: wind turbine turbulence interferes weather forecasting

While the wind power generation lobby wishes everyone to believe that the large, industrial-scale power generators are pretty little wind  mills, beautifying the landscapes, the reality is something different.
  Environment Canada has notified everyone using their weather maps that wind turbine turbulence can interfere with the accuracy of information produced by its radar stations.
See the Environment Canada website, here: http://ec.gc.ca/meteo-weather/default.asp?lang=En&n=1D1B608B-1

Goldhawk 11:15 today: wind power project threatens gas well, water supply

Featured on the Goldhawk radio show on Zoomer Radio AM 740 Toronto today will be two Ontario citizens expressing concern about a wind power project and the threat to a gas well in the Wst Lincoln-Hamilton area, and the local water supply. Ed Engel and Anne Fairfield will be on the show at 11:15 to discuss.
 
“This is about a Gas Well situation on Sixteen Road that was properly installed many years ago near the Road Allowance.  Now the HAF Wind Energy Project wants to bury the Electrical Collector Line within 5 metres of one Gas Well,” says Anne Fairfield.  “The MNR Policies and Regulations say that nothing should be installed within 75 m of a Gas Well, and the proponents have no Engineer’s Report (required) to say otherwise, nor were they asked to produce one.
“The problems are these:
This case has reached the point where the Health and Safety of a very densely populated rural area of West Lincoln and Hamilton is threatened if no immediate action is taken.  There are 244 homes and families (not just receptors) within 2 km of these five Industrial Wind Turbines.
“Members of our community told the Ministry of the Environment last year in the commenting process about our gas wells concern, yet the proponents and the Ministries granting approval have not been held to account.”
Non-commercial natural gas may be odorless, tasteless, and colourless, Fairfield explains.  A private gas well may also produce gas containing hydrogen sulphide, which is poisonous and should be treated with caution  It is fatal to humans in small concentrations and causes rapid corrosion of pipes.
“These gas well pipes are very old, and do not need to be corroded any more.  They also connect to a house.   When we can smell sulphur at our water taps, it is a good indication that hydrogen sulphide is around.The very fact that we have gas wells in West Lincoln, and most of us rely on our water wells, indicates to us that we have a very short term problem now and a longer term problem ahead with fracking for the gas.”
Tune in and call in with your questions or concerns to 1-866-740-4740 or 1-416-30-0740 to Dale Goldhawk on Zoomer Radio Am 740 after 11 a.m. Listen LIVE at zoomerradio.ca

Boone Pickens: “lost my ass in the wind business”

Before we bring you this article on US billionaire Boone Pickens, we would like to preface it by saying we heard Mr Pickens interviewed perhaps three years ago on the CBC on the topic of wind power and his foray into Ontario. We thought he was the most honest wind power developer we had heard from: he never mentioned people dying, nevr mentioned climate change or the need to “save” the environment—investing in wind power, he said, was all about the money. He came to Ontario because of the generous subsidies but he also allowed as to how wind power was really all about natural gas.
  We are also reminded in reading this story of a remark made by media personality Kevin O’Leary on the Lang-O’Leary Exchange, also on CBC, that as an investor, he wouldn’t “touch wind with a ten-foot pole.”
   “Anything that relies on subsidies isn’t a real business,” he snapped.
   Here now, several years on, is the fate of Mr Pickens and wind power.

Daily Caller News Foundation

  

Wind investments blow Pickens off the Forbes 400 list

5:28 PM 09/16/2013
Breanna Deutsch

Businessman T. Boone Pickens was dropped from the Forbes 400 list of richest Americans after losing much of his fortune in the wind farming industry.
According to Forbes, Pickens’ fortune dropped below the $ 1 billion mark for the first time since 2005. His net worth once amounted to an estimated $2 billion, but now it sits at around $950 million.
He told the hosts of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that he had “lost [his] ass in the [wind] business.” He added, “the jobs are in oil and gas.”
In 2008, Pickens debuted his “Pickens Plan,” which aimed to increase the nation’s use of wind energy and decrease America’s dependence on OPEC oil. With the help of investors he spent 80 million dollars on TV ads to promote his plan and $2 billion on General Electric wind turbines. Pickens hoped that once the wind farm was constructed, it would be the largest in the world.
The plan collapsed after natural gas prices fell and selling wind power was no longer economically feasible. He lost $150 million of his personal fortune on the failed wind plan.
After his failure in the wind market, Pickens revamped his Pickens Plan to focus on the use of natural gas as well as any other American-based energy source.
He has made moves to convert all trucks from using gasoline to natural gas. As part of this effort, he has encouraged Obama to use subsidies in order to incentivize the trucking industry to make the switch.
Pickens says that this new endeavor is mainly an effort to “end America’s addiction to foreign oil,” though critics also speculate that although the former billionaire is now 84, profits are driving his interest in energy policy.
The American energy man wants the world to know that he will be able to survive living off of his mere $950 million. When ESPN’s Darren Rovell confronted Pickens over Twitter about his new status as a millionaire, Pickens tweeted, “Don’t worry. At $950 million, I’m doing fine. Funny, my $1 billion charitable giving exceeds my net worth.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/16/wind-investments-blow-pickens-off-the-forbes-400-list/#ixzz2fFEtzLiR

Belwood to Premier Wynne: quiet country roads no more

To The Honourable Kathleen Wynne:
This is how it went last night in Belwood.  A group of neighbours met at the wpd wind turbine construction site after work and as a courtesy called the OPP Liaison Team to let them know we’d be there.
After about 20 minutes of gathering, a police cruiser stopped by and the officer asked how long we were going to be protesting.
We explained we weren’t protesting and asked if it was ok to stand on the road and park our cars on the side.  The police officer was very helpful and said this was no problem.
He left and another cruiser went by.  Both parked in the IWT host landowner’s driveway until we left an hour later.  We have no issue with the OPP and hold the liaison team in highest regard. 
As Premier of the Province and Minister of Agriculture, I thought you should know what transpired.   You are responsible for destroying the democratic rights of rural people through your Green Energy Act.  You have put us in harms way for adverse health impacts and property devaluation.  Now, you’ve imposed a police state on us.  You’ve created an environment where it is not permissible to stand at the side of a country lane without interference.  With all respect Premier, your policies favouring wind industrialists and your high level redirection of police services to focus on concerned rural citizens, is nothing short of harassment.

Premier Wynne, we still live in a democracy.

Janet Vallery,
Oppose Belwood Wind Farm

Property values “plummet” near wind power projects

Studies Show Land-Based Wind Turbines Cause Property Values to Plummet; Wind Wise Massachusetts Claims Study Showing Otherwise is Misleading

Published Monday, Sep. 16, 2013


FALMOUTH, Mass., Sept. 16, 2013 — /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — A national study that claims there is “no statistical evidence” that real estate prices near wind turbines are negatively impacted is misleading because it lumps homes close to the turbines with those miles away, according to Wind Wise Massachusetts (WWMA).
“The report’s own data found that homes located within one mile to the turbines decreased in value by 28 percent compared to homes located within 3 to 10 miles from the turbines,” according to Virginia Irvine, president of WWMA (windwisema.org), a statewide alliance of grassroots environmental groups and individuals.
“The study’s authors are just perpetuating the myth that wind turbines are not responsible for significant property losses,” she said.
“The report is also comparing apples with oranges as less than 2.5 percent of the more than 50,000 home sales analyzed in recently released Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory study were within one mile of the turbines and some were as far as 10 miles away,” Irvine said.  
In the widely publicized report, the authors stated in the abstract that “…we find no statistical evidence that home values near turbines were affected in the post-construction or post-announcement/pre-construction periods.”
The report -– A Spatial Hedonic Analysis of the Effects of Wind Energy Facilities on Surrounding Property Values in the United States –- was published by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in August.
Irvine said independent, comprehensive appraisals have found that land-based wind turbines can cause property values to plummet within two miles by 15 percent to 40 percent.
“There is a major difference between turbines in a power plant 10 miles from homes in the country to those that are less than one mile from homes in residential communities,” Irvine said.
“But the sad fact is that whether a wind turbine is near a solo home in the country or in a more heavily populated area, the homeowner is going to see a significant loss in the value of his home,” she added.
“Wind turbines near residential areas are devastating to home values,” according to Michael McCann, president of McCann Appraisal of Chicago.
He said his paired study analysis of homes near wind turbines in more than two dozen communities throughout the country “consistently have found homes losing 25 to 40 per cent of their value.
Contact:  Barry Wanger for Wind Wise Massachusetts, Wanger Associates, 617-965-6469, Barry@WangerAssociates.com
SOURCE Wind Wise Massachusetts

Is it “green” to destroy a forest?

The editors at NetNewsLedger are asking that question…how “green” is it to erect huge invasive wind turbines?
  Read the editorial here:

Excerpt:

Thunder Bay–editorial–James Murray
Ontario has an electricity surplus. That is the word coming out from Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli.The Ontario government is set to pay wind farm producers not to produce energy.
In Thunder Bay, an old growth Maple Forest is in the process of being destroyed to put in a wind farm.
The irony is incredible.
Northwestern Ontario, and the Thunder Bay District, was able to supply electrical power to run all the grain elevators at full capacity along with several paper mills in our area. There isn’t a shortage, well, at least a not shortage of electricity.
Common sense, however?
Maybe the shortfall is there.
…The real issue is silence.Virtually no one is effectively standing up for the trees.Part of that is that city councillors who are opposed to the proposed project are virtually gagged. If they speak out, the city will not cover their legal fees.

Please see the rest at the NetNewsLedger website
Note the comment made by pro-wind blogger Mike Barnard.

Destruction of Maple Forest for Green Energy

THUNDER BAY – Editorial – Ontario has an electricity surplus. That is the word coming out from Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli. The Ontario Government is set to pay wind farm producers not to produce energy.
In Thunder Bay, an old growth Maple Forest is in the process of being destroyed to put in a wind farm.
The irony is incredible.
Northwestern Ontario, and the Thunder Bay District was able to supply electrical power to run all the grain elevators at full capacity, along with the several paper mills in our area. There isn’t a shortage, well, at least not a shortage of electricity.
Common sense however?
Maybe the shortfall is there?
At issue appears that no one locally is willing to stand up for the future of the hardwood maple forest. The process forward is in the hands of the Ontario Government.
The real issue is one of silence. Virtually no one is effectively standing up for the trees. Part of that is that city councillors who are opposed to the proposed project are effectively gagged. If they speak out, the city will not cover their legal fees.

Is it ‘Green’ to Destroy a Forest?

There are many who would say that to knock down a hardwood forest taking out about an acre for the base of each turbine, and kilometres of roadways, isn’t really green.
Having been to the work site, it is easy to see that what is happening is wrong. Trees are being knocked down in what is said to be for testing – what is really happening is pre-construction preparation work.
Likely there will be a day off in the distant future, twenty or thirty years from now when these turbines are going to be de-commissioned, that some future Thunder Bay taxpayers are going to look at the cost, and wonder, what kind of thought process put the community into the position they will inherit.
Thunder Bay has entered into a bad deal, and it sadly seems nothing can be done to stop the destruction.
There likely are real solutions, but with no one ‘allowed’ or willing to talk, those solutions are not likely to happen.
Ontario taxpayers will be left holding the bag once again.
That of course is just my opinion, as always, your mileage may vary.
James Murray
– See more at: http://www.netnewsledger.com/2013/09/15/green-destroy-forest/#sthash.gOtrnMvk.dpuf

 0  14  0  44

Thunder Bay Maple Forest
Right now an old growth Maple Forest is under ‘attack’, right here in Thunder Bay on the Nor’Westers.

Destruction of Maple Forest for Green Energy

THUNDER BAY – Editorial – Ontario has an electricity surplus. That is the word coming out from Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli. The Ontario Government is set to pay wind farm producers not to produce energy.
In Thunder Bay, an old growth Maple Forest is in the process of being destroyed to put in a wind farm.
The irony is incredible.
Northwestern Ontario, and the Thunder Bay District was able to supply electrical power to run all the grain elevators at full capacity, along with the several paper mills in our area. There isn’t a shortage, well, at least not a shortage of electricity.
Common sense however?
Maybe the shortfall is there?
At issue appears that no one locally is willing to stand up for the future of the hardwood maple forest. The process forward is in the hands of the Ontario Government.
The real issue is one of silence. Virtually no one is effectively standing up for the trees. Part of that is that city councillors who are opposed to the proposed project are effectively gagged. If they speak out, the city will not cover their legal fees.

Is it ‘Green’ to Destroy a Forest?

There are many who would say that to knock down a hardwood forest taking out about an acre for the base of each turbine, and kilometres of roadways, isn’t really green.
Having been to the work site, it is easy to see that what is happening is wrong. Trees are being knocked down in what is said to be for testing – what is really happening is pre-construction preparation work.
Likely there will be a day off in the distant future, twenty or thirty years from now when these turbines are going to be de-commissioned, that some future Thunder Bay taxpayers are going to look at the cost, and wonder, what kind of thought process put the community into the position they will inherit.
Thunder Bay has entered into a bad deal, and it sadly seems nothing can be done to stop the destruction.
There likely are real solutions, but with no one ‘allowed’ or willing to talk, those solutions are not likely to happen.
Ontario taxpayers will be left holding the bag once again.
That of course is just my opinion, as always, your mileage may vary.
James Murray

– See more at: http://www.netnewsledger.com/2013/09/15/green-destroy-forest/#sthash.gOtrnMvk.dpuf

Veteran battles Hydro One over “smart” meters

Those of us who have to deal with Hydro One know how heavy-handed the power supplier can be. Here‘s what’s happening when one Ontario resident decided to stand up to them.

Veteran battles Hydro One over meter

211

Simon Kent

By ,Toronto Sun

First posted: | Updated:

Let’s start with a quick quiz.
Do you think your home is your castle, protected under common law as yours and yours alone?
Further, do you think you hold the right to say who enters your property and the terms under which they do?
Answer “yes” to both questions?
Maybe it’s time to think again.
As Ontario householders are finding, utility company Hydro One reserves absolute privilege to enter your private property whenever a representative sees fit.The reason they want access is to install new electronic smart meters, now being rolled out across the province as part of a multi-million dollar program funded by the taxpayers of Ontario.
For various legitimate reasons, including health, privacy and safety, many people are opposed to the forced installation of this new wireless metering system. But they’re discovering they have no way of seeking an exemption or opting out.
Like Second World War veteran Russell Irwin. The 91-year-old says the company replaced his old meter with a new digital version directly against his wishes and without permission.
This is what happened to Irwin.
“The Hydro people first came one day and we told them to get out and stay out,” Irwin said. “The next Sunday morning they snuck back in and put the Smart meter in anyway.“They said they’ve got every right to do these things but they should have asked first whether we want the new smart meter or not.
“The answer would have been obviously no.”
Mr. Irwin has since refused to pay any more bills until the old meter is returned and the company offers an apology.Hydro One’s response has been to inform him to be prepared to have his power cut off by Tuesday.
Irwin is ready for a long battle with the utility giant and his personal history reveals why he is determined not to give in.
It’s just not in his nature.
The former Canadian Grenadier Guard served as a tank driver in the Second World War as a member of the 22nd Canadian Armoured Regiment (CAR), a unit of 4th Canadian (Armoured) Division.
He deployed to Normandy in July 1944 and from that time until VE Day on May 8, 1945, was with 22 CAR in battles around the Falaise Pocket in France, in Belgium, the Netherlands and finally across the Rhine.On his return, Irwin continued to serve but in a different capacity. He lived in Toronto, raised a family and dedicated 35 years of his life saving others as a firefighter paramedic before retiring to his farm at Orangeville.
The last thing he says he wants to do is spend his remaining years fighting the Hydro, but as his son-in-law Dwayne Huxted explains, he has no choice.“Since the installation of the new meter, two of my father-in-law’s computers have stopped working while the Internet has been disconnecting regularly,” Huxted said. “None of that was happening prior.He also has had a noticeable increase in intensity of ringing in the ears and balance problems, both of which were originally attributed to his war service.”
Complaints over the forced installation and impending power cut off have been filed with the Ombudsman, Hydro One and the Ontario Energy Board but to no avail; the utility remains committed to installing the meters over any consumer resistance.Around 1.4 million wireless meters have been placed on homes and apartments throughout the province. The aim of the McGuinty government initiative was to help reduce energy consumption by showing consumers how to save money in off-peak hours. Smart meters for smart usage is the claim.
Opponents claim the new meters don’t just monitor their usage, but have the potential in the future to restrict or cut power supply to individual appliances as well as collect information on usage to be shared without the consent or knowledge of the consumer.For its part Hydro One, refused a request to reveal whether or not direct permission was sought to enter Mr. Irwin’s rural estate to fit the new meter.
A spokesman offered this response to the inquiry.“The Electricity Act (Section 40) and Hydro One’s Conditions of Service permit us to maintain and replace our meter at our customers’ premises. A customer does not need to be home for the installation to take place.”
Not good enough, said Dwayne Huxted. He is worried that his father-in-law will be taken off grid Tuesday and faces a winter without power.He also maintains that repeated requests for Hydro One to send a copy of the original contact had been denied, making it almost impossible to determine their legal standing.
“We say the meter was installed without consent, it is an invasion of privacy, it has the ability to collect information about us and our home that is ours alone and then it is communicated wirelessly and possibly on-sold to any number of anonymous organizations or corporations.
“It also looks like needless Hydro One bullying of a war veteran who is simply standing up for his rights and getting bulldozed by a vast, anonymous state service provider for his troubles.
“It looks bad because it is bad.”

Audubon Society in the U.S. raises alarm about turbines and raptor kills

The National Audubon Society in the United States has begun a fund-raising campaign to help save the raptors being killed by wind power generation projects in the U.S.
  Here is a message from Audubon VP Government Relations, Michael Daulton.

The Wind Challenge

Properly-sited wind power is a critical part of America’s clean energy future, and an important part of our strategy for solving the threat of global warming. But wind turbines can be a real threat to eagles and other birds. The same windswept ridges raptors favor for soaring are also ideal places for electricity-generating wind farms. The tip of a giant turbine blade moves faster than 100 mph—much too fast for even an eagle eye to perceive. Thousands of hawks, eagles, and other migrating birds collide with wind turbines every year. The results are almost always fatal.

Audubon was among the first organizations to raise the alarm, and to work to find the right balance between the need for renewable energy and the need to protect amazing birds like the Swainson’s Hawk and the Golden Eagle. Bird-lovers like you have been actively engaged both on the ground and at the federal policy level to protect birds and keep eagles soaring.

  • Audubon experts played a key role on a 22-person federal advisory committee that spent three years developing the first-ever nationwide guidelines aimed at minimizing the threat of wind power to eagles and all other birds.
  • As you read this, an Audubon team in Washington D.C. is in active negotiations with the wind energy industry, the White House and key federal agencies to forge a permitting process directed solely at the conservation of eagles.

Meanwhile, Audubon members are leading the fight to oppose poorly-sited wind farms and to guide wind power away from vulnerable bird habitats. Local chapters, like Golden Gate Audubon in California, have won landmark victories for birds at places like Altamont Pass in central California and other sites where turbines put eagles and other raptors at risk. These are the real heroes of Audubon, who inspire me every day by making a real difference for birds like the Golden Eagle. 

We object to the idea that wind power generation is the answer to the need for power in anything but an industrial application, but we applaud the recognition of the serious and probably irreversible harm to the natural environment.
For more information, go to the website at: www.audubon.org

The Long-Term Energy Plan consultation in Sault St Marie: joke

The North has seemed to be weeping copiously, perhaps for the desecration of the Great Spirit Island which is currently being spiked with icons of greed energy.  Torrents of rain have torn out roads and flooded already sodden low areas. Public enthusiasm for the Long Term Energy Plan “engagement” in Sault Ste Marie was dampened, though not a complete washout.
http://www.saultstar.com/2013/09/10/states-of-emergency-called-in-outlying-municipalities-motorcyclist-dead

As per usual, invited stakeholders (listed below) enjoyed the opportunity for a sit down presentation, refreshments and round table discussion; the poster board community walk-through format, insultingly reminiscent of greed energy developers’ public cons in form and content, awaited the common folk despite advise to the contrary.  The Ministry of Energy team did graciously extend a last minute invitation to this loitering individual who was between an earlier appointment and hours of Wifi work in a lobby armchair.  The opportunity to observe and compare was not to be missed…

After a brief intro, presentation by the OPA and opportunity to mingle, the various labelled tables attracted participants eager to give input.  NUCLEAR had plenty of space.  Only Deucksoo Lee, of the Korean engineering firm KEPCO, was in conversation with the moderator; storm-delayed, Steven Jellich later joined us.  His affiliation with Union Gas inclined him to be a spoiler for nuclear, not wanting the evaluation of nuclear to be entirely lacking in consideration of emissions and concerned about expense of new build.

After a break the Renewables and transmission table filled, possibly with fewer vested interests because after introductions there was a lengthy pause when the moderator read from the “Making Choices” section on renewables the statement:
“Looking beyond 2018, what goal should Ontario set to ensure that non-hydro renewable energy continues to play an important role in meeting Ontario’s supply needs?”

This reporter, taking exception to the idea that the unreliables are playing an important role used Prince Wind Farm’s chronic inability to match peak production with Ontario’s demand as handy evidence that meeting Ontario’s supply needs with wind is wishful thinking.  Prince Township Reeve Ken Lamming interjected that windfarms are a waste of space, suggesting existing infrastructure should be refurbished or converted to gain supply efficiencies without more environmental damage.

The moderator’s claim of CO2 abatement benefits was rebuffed with the BENTEK Energy reports, the IESO rep at the table tried to suggest Ontario’s situation might be different…

The Deputy Energy Minister was at a simultaneously held LTEP meeting in Kenora so his assistant in attendance here was the target for an almost constant stream of objection to inadequacies, claims and statements from the Ministry Of Energy.  He became the focus of even more attention at the evening session when determined stewards of Lake Superior braved the flooding and washouts to make sure Ministry was hearing our concerns about increased fire risks, lack of performance bonds on decommissioning plans, lack of Democracy, lack of honest costing for the unreliables, the fallacy of jobs from wind farms…

EBR comments needed… as a representative of the Ministry of Energy said, while our objections and arguments will stay with them and influence their thinking while preparing recommendations and position papers for the Minister, their voice counts for much less than that of the voters – us.  


So please submit your comments to the EBR Registry Number: 011-9490, Title: Making Choices: Reviewing Ontario’s Long-Term Energy Plan
The comment period for this notice has been extended by 7 days to September 16, 2013, to allow for additional consultation.
To submit a comment online, go to http://tinyurl.com/l8lepsr
All comments on this proposal must be directed to:

Julie Green
0Senior Policy Advisor
Ministry of Energy
Regulatory Affairs and Strategic Policy
Strategic Policy Branch
880 Bay Street
2nd floor
Toronto Ontario
M7A 2C1
List of stakeholders invited to the Sault Ste Marie afternoon session:
Stephen Bieda: Sun Country Highways Ltd/Golden Horseshoe Electric Vehicle Association
Keith Clarida: Clarida’s
Tim Janzen: MET Energy Systems
Steven Jelich: Union Gas
Daniel Kaute: Environmental Waste International
Colin Kirkwood: Sault College
Dawn Lambe: Biomass Innovation Centre – Nipissing U
Ken Lamming: Prince Township
Tim Lavoie: Algoma POwer – Utilities- Distribution
Deucksoo Lee: KEPCO Engineering & Construction Company Inc.
Joe Maure: Ministry of Natural Resources
Jason Naccarato: Sault Ste Marie Innovation Centre
Dominic Parrella: PUC Distribution Inc.
Lory Patteri: Town of Bruce Mines
Martin Pochtaruk: Helene Inc
Robert Reid: M-Sci Technologies Inc./Sault Ste Marie Chamber of Commerce/Sault Ste Marie Economic Development Corp
Dan Richards: Algoma Power Inc – Utilities – Distribution
Trevor Sawchyn: Solar Logix Sault Ste Marie
Megan Smith: Ministry of Natural Resources
Alan Spacek: Town of Kapuskasing
Grant Taibossigai: M’Cheeging First Nation
Jim Tait: Great Lakes Power Transmission

Many thanks to those of you who braved the elements to attend the public evening session and share your concerns, objections and arguments with the representatives from the Ministry of Energy!