The ‘treachery’ of Ontario’s wind power program

Independent newspaper publisher Rick Conroy of The Times reviews the decisions by the Environmental Review Tribunal to uphold the approval of the wind power project on little Amherst Island. The facts when laid out this way are shocking … and shameful.

Planned devastation of Amherst Island, wildlife and Ontario economy
Planned devastation of Amherst Island, wildlife and Ontario economy

The Times, August 12, 2016

From Amherst Island, you can see the Lennox gas-fired generating station sitting idle most days. The plant sits just across the narrow channel. It burns both oil and gas to produce steam that, in turn, drives generators to create electricity. The plant has the capacity to generate 2,100 MW of electricity—enough to power more than a million homes. But that electricity is rarely ever used. Over the last decade, the Lennox station has operated at less than three per cent of its capacity. That means it is idle much more often than it runs. Yet it earns more than $7 million each month—whether it runs or doesn’t. Such is Ontario’s hyperpoliticized energy regime.

Last Thursday was a warm day across Ontario— one of the warmest in a hot summer. With air conditioners humming, electricity demand across the province peaked at 22,312 MW. Meanwhile, Lennox sat idle all day. As it does most days.

So it seems odd that yet another gas-fired generating plant is emerging from the ground next to the mostly-idle Lennox station. It will add another 900 MW of generating capacity to a grid that clearly doesn’t need any more.

From Amherst Island, it must seem cruel. Within a couple of kilometres, there is enough unused power generating capacity to light millions of homes, yet island residents are being forced to give up their pastoral landscape— for the sake of an intermittent electricity source that nobody needs.

Last week, an Environmental Review Tribunal rejected an appeal by Amherst Island residents seeking to stop Windlectric, a wind energy developer, from covering their island home from end to end with industrial wind turbines, each one soaring 55 storeys into the sky.

Amherst Island is tiny. Just 20 kilometres long and 7 kilometres wide, there is no place, no horizon, no home that can avoid being transformed by this out-ofscale industrialization.

The treachery gets worse. Amherst Island is administered by a council that presides over the larger Loyalist Township from the mainland. Last year, council made a deal with the wind developer, agreeing to recieve a $500,000 payment each year the wind turbines spin. It is a lot of money for a municipality that operates on a $12-million budget annually.

But perhaps the most disappointing bit of this story is the damage that has been done to friendships and families on Amherst Island. Just 450 people live here. It swells to about 600 in the summer. It was a close community in the way island life tends to be.

Industrial wind energy has, however, ripped this community in two. Property owners hoping to share in the windfall from the development are on one side and those who must endure the blight on the landscape for a generation or more on the other.

Lifelong friends no longer speak to each other. At St. Paul’s Presbyterian service on Sunday mornings, the wind energy benefactors sit on one side of the church, the opponents on the other. A hard, angry line silently divides this community.

The Environmental Review Tribunal concluded not enough evidence was presented in the hearings to say the project will cause serious and irreversible harm to endangered species including the bobolink, Blanding’s turtle and little brown bat.

The decision underlines the terrible and oppressive cruelty of the Green Energy Act—that the only appeal allowed for opponents is whether the project will cause serious harm to human health or serious and irreversible harm to plant life, animal life or the natural environment. It is a profoundly unjust restriction on the right of people to challenge the policies and decisions of their government as they directly impact their lives.

The folks on Amherst Island weren’t permitted, for example, to argue that the power is unneeded— that this project is a grotesquely wasteful use of provincial tax dollars. Their neighbourhood already boasts enough electricity capacity to power a small country, yet it sits idle—at a cost of millions of dollars each month. It might have been a useful addition to the debate—but this evidence wasn’t permitted.

Nor were island residents allowed to appeal the fundamental alteration of their landscape. Nor the loss of property value. They can’t undo the broken friendships and the hollow feeling that hangs over the church suppers or the lonely trips across the channel.

Wide swathes of reason and logic have been excluded in the consideration of renewable energy projects in Ontario.

To the extent that urban folks are even aware of what green energy policies are doing to places like Amherst Island, they console themselves by believing it is the cost of a clean energy future—that diminishing the lives of some rural communities is an acceptable trade-off for the warm feeling of doing better by the planet.

Yet these folks need to explain to Amherst Island residents how decimating their landscape, risking the survival of endangered species and filling the pockets of a developer with taxpayer dollars for an expensive power supply that nobody needs makes Ontario greener.

Visit Amherst Island. Soon.

Remember it as it is today. Mourn for its tomorrow.

 

rick@wellingtontimes.ca

Read the full opinion here.

 

Comments

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Just sickening this whole deal and how it’s done…. low down…. sneaky… greedy…
Come on rural ontario let’s stop this crap!!!
Let’s let this government know that this isn’t going to happen any more!!! Stop this madness!!!!

Pat Cusack
Reply

How is anyone going to be able to stop this madness? And on my Facebook is a post from Bird Studies about a Federal Minister’s concerns. My comment was that she should start with Ms. Wynne!!!!! Oops, I forgot the Liberals are in “power“. While they all enjoy another vaca, we the people are having to put up with more *&?%!

Pat Cusack
Reply

p.s. What a bunch of out and out hypocrites!

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Yes the GEA is riddled with hypocrisy and incompetence…..

saving the moon
Reply

“Serious harm to human health?” It doesn’t seem to matter much to the the powers that be, that it’s killing families to try and keep up with their hydro bills and put food on the table. Wynn’s perception of serious harm is her own. She continues to stick her head in the sand.
There should be a moratorium on all power projects at this point.
Excellent article!

Barbara
Reply

Who will have to pay for safe drinking water brought from the mainland if the water supply at Amherst Island becomes unsafe?

Ontario has been “sold-out”.

Barbara
Reply

‘Minimizing Transport Of Human Pathogens Into Watersheds’

“Southwestern Ontario has a high risk of pathogen migration to groundwater because of intensive agriculture, wet climate, highly permeable and shallow soils, and high water tables.”

https://www.uoguelph.ca/crc/dunfield/research/minimizing-transport-human-bacterial-pathogens-watersheds

Anyone of the above or a combination of these could be a factors in rural areas of Ontario where well water is used as water supply.

Unnecessary soil disturbance in Ontario.

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Saving the moon…..
Hear ya there ….. my friend has medium sized grocery store in London… last hydro one bill was just under……. are you ready…..
$23,0000.00 !!!!! Yes that’s right….
TWENTY THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS!!!!
Why dont Ontarions want more wind and solar projects??? Because we don’t need them!!!

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Also don’t forget Thibault stated that just because you are having trouble paying your hydro bill does not constitute a crisis for him or his government! !!! Pure arrogance!!!!

Bruce Wills
Reply

Put the wind turbines along the Toronto waterfront in recognition of the bozos that elected the Liberals and see how they feel about them! It’s a lot easier to subject their political opponents who have no voice in decisions.

cory riley
Reply

The Wynne liberals have never listined to anybody because it interferes with their agenda.obviously your district did not vote Liberal so she will cram this down your throat because it does not cost her votes.

Barbara
Reply

Vibrationdamage . com

‘Vibration 101’

Scroll down to: Ground Vibrations

Ground vibrations can be either natural or man-made.

If vibration measurements are made prior to construction then any differences from the original measurements can be determined later.

http://www.vibrationdamage.com/vibration_101.htm

Barbara
Reply

Air quality/particulate samples/tests could be done prior to, during and after construction.

Barbara
Reply

A well water profile can be assembled for individual wells.

A chemical analysis of well water is important too.

Online look for: Water Quality Testing Services & look for private companies.

Certified lab is needed.

Same for vibration testing & look for private companies that are certified.

Neltje
Reply

I am speechless. Nothing that we do, or say can change the mind of our Liberal government! When government cares about lining their own pockets and those of their friends – we all lose. Nothing short of a major catastrophe will change things, and in this case the catastrophe is being government created as we speak.

Sommer
Reply

“Lifelong friends no longer speak to each other. At St. Paul’s Presbyterian service on Sunday mornings, the wind energy benefactors sit on one side of the church, the opponents on the other. A hard, angry line silently divides this community”
This sort of situation has occurred in Huron County as well.
In Ashfield Colborne Wawanosh, we even had a Councillor say, when voting not to declare ACW an ‘unwilling host’ that she was so grateful for her democratic right to vote for the leaseholders. In so doing, she voted to bring further adverse health impacts and financial loss to residents who are being forced against their will to have these turbines sited too close to their homes! To her, this is democracy!

Phillip
Reply

That is a pretty one-side take on this project. First of all natural gas is a terrible pollutant as a major contributor to greenhouse gases and climate change. New studies have shown that natural gas is in fact worst than the burning of coal for the atmosphere. Wind power should always be turned on before natural gas and in fact it should eventually replace natural gas. As for this specific project on Amherst Island, since 2011 there has been plenty of public consultation and study. There was absolutely no evidence that this project would be a threat to human or wild life health or to property values. Over a very long 5 years this project was put the wringer. The company and the municipality bent-over backwards to accommodate the concerns of the residents. A great number of people in the community support the project.

AIxit
Reply

Your statistics, fact sources and recall of the history of what was supposed to be “due process” are very frugal with the truth Philip. With the “GEA” in place the legal fight for the community to save A.I. was like a boxer with one hand tied up. ” A great number of people in the community support the project.” What the H does that mean? A small minority on A.I. support the project. “The company and the municipality bent-over backwards to accommodate the concerns of the residents.” With the “GEA” the residents supporting NO WTs were bent over forward by the company and the Municipality has splinters in their r ears from fence sitting and hernias from pocketing buy money and allowing pro WT employees to cut down healthy trees to accommodate proposed roads. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/natural-gas-really-better-coal-180949739/?no-ist

Bert
Reply

Phillip what have you been using that ruined your brains?

Phillip
Reply

Alxit, “with the GEA in place the legal fight for the community to save AI was like a boxer with one hand tied up”? really? there was 5 years of study and public consultation. The community had plenty of opportunity to voice their concerns and influence the process. There were even local municipal elections. There is absolutely nothing wrong for municipalities to support projects that puts money in the local community. There is still plenty of debate out there on natural gas. It depends on the methane leakage. Your Smithonian link is not the definite opinion. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/earth/methane-regulations/ Bert, that did not take long for the personal insults to fly?

notinduttondunwich
Reply

People…. leave Phillip out of this….. him and windbuddy are on the liberal tit….. the only people who support this nonsense GEA are those that are receiving blood money from our government…. it’s the only logical reason that he wants them there…. like our leaseholders here in DD they won’t and don’t care…..

Phillip
Reply

notinduttondunwich, a lot of assumptions in your comment. how about I care about the planet…

ScepticalGord
Reply

We all care about the planet. We all live here, right?

Ontario built 19 or so gas plants, 2 were cancelled for 1.2 $billion (that’s over a THOUSAND times a million, for millennials that can’t do math), to back up intermittent, unreliable wind power.

There are plenty of other green energy options that have been documented on this and other similar anti-wind sites.

Wind turbines are the worst choice for so many reasons.
Do some research and you’ll find out why.

Phillip
Reply

“2 were cancelled for 1.2 $billion”

which two were cancelled that cost $1.2 billion? can you provide a link? I was not aware of that.

“Wind turbines are the worst choice for so many reasons.”

Wind power is growing exponentially all over the world. The IEA predicts it will make up about 20% of all global electricity generation by 2050 with others saying as much as a 1/3 by 2050. In the U.S. it already represent a quarter of all new electricity generating capacity. If I were to listen to you, I guess everyone around the world is just wrong with going for wind generation.

Phillip

according to your own Wiki reference, those plants were not cancelled, but just built at a different location. it did not cost $1.2 billion to cancel those plants, as most of that $1.2 billion was just for the cost to build the plants. most of those costs to build the plants were to be incurred whether they went with the original locations or not. There was some additional transmission cost due to the plant being further from the end-market for the electricity, but that is what you have to pay if you want to move the plants further from urban areas. They should have picked the Napanee location from the start and therefore would have still paid the extra transmission costs. However, there was a $275 million savings through a lower negotiated price for the Napanee plant. At most $70 million was wasted from penalties from cancelled contracts. the government at the time should have consulted the public more thoroughly ahead of time, although we cannot fault them too much, as attempting to put those plants in Oakville and Mississauga made sense, given they were just replacing the Lakeview coal plant that was already on the Mississauga/Oakville border.

ScepticalGord
Reply

Phillip,

Thanks for briefing me on the Ontario Liberal Government’s official spin on the gas plant scandal … but I’ve already seen this sleight of hand.

If I have to choose between believing “Phillip” the troll / mole, or the Auditor General, I’ll take the latter.

Yup, it seems WCO has really hit a nerve with the wind proponents, to the point of having them hire people with too much time on their hands to try and beat back the growing opposition. They must really be afraid.

So Phillip, it’s been a slice, but I’m done dueling with a blind man.

Phillip

Gord,

You hear something you do not like and goes against everything you think you have been told and you resort to name calling. Classic.

I am just quoting your own Wikipedia link. Everything I said is right in your Wikipedia link. You should really try and read your own links before you reference them.

You seem rather confused about the numbers and what they include and actually mean. You do not seem to have a good grasp of what actually happened with the gas plants.

Instead of refuting anything I actually said you bring in some nonsense about the “Liberal Party” and start name calling. Very weak.

windbuddy
Reply

Philip, if you are going to post on this site, you must lower your prospective. The site is mostly exclusive to wind energy haters. The title “wind concerns” is a misnomer. Set aside any expectation of rational thought by the poster when reading the replies to your comments. The site merely provides a platform for people like NUTinduttondunwich to rant about things he knows nothing about, exaggerate any of his statistics, make threats of violence, and feel important for a couple of minutes. He likes to blame wind energy on everything from electricity prices, pollution in the lake, sore toes, all woes, headaches, and hemorrhoids. As is the case with many of the stubborn and uninformed, he resorts to swearing when challenged in any way. He probably has no experience with living among turbines, but will speak as if he knows what it is like to do so. Like all of my neighbours, my health, income, lifestyle, property values, and happiness have not been negatively affected by living in proximity to turbines. The fight to stop wind development is over. Most of the posters on this site just refuse to admit it.

Barbara
Reply

Ontario is about to be over-with too.

I’ve had bacteriology, diagnostic bacteriology, soil microbiology, mycology and plant pathology.

I know what pathogenic organisms can do and I’m not trying to scare people.

And people do need to know the facts.

Barbara
Reply

‘Livestock On-Farm Biosecurity Information Guide’, Ontario

P.39
‘Wildlife, Pets and Pests’

“Wash farm clothing separately from other household laundry and use detergents and bleach or washing soda. Wash coveralls in hot water. Drying in a hot dryer is also an important part of the cleaning process.”

No need for farmers to have hot water for washing. Cold water will do just as well? Hydro conservation is more important.

Rodents can destroy grain so it’s not fit for consumption. But cats kill more birds than IWTs do? And city folks buy this kind of misinformation.

http://www.ontlpc.ca/pdfs/downloads/olpc-livestock_web.pdf

ScepticalGord
Reply

If the fight to stop wind development is like, so over, why do wind proponents keep giving this website the time of day, constantly posting on this useless board?

Why do you keep reading the same old crap that all these no-nothing wind opponents keep spewing out.

Don’t you have bigger fish to fry? More planets to save?

Barbara
Reply

No smart person would invest in machinery that has zero reliability unless there is an another angle/angles to making money from such investments.

Phillip
Reply

I am very well versed in Wind Concerns Ontario (WCO). It is not about facts or being honest. It is just a political organization like several others that have grabbed on to environmental and electricity market issues in Ontario. WCO or its followers have very little interest in having a real objective conversation about the issues. It is just a social media astroturf strategy put in place by several well known political operatives (Parker Gallant among them) to create a wedge issue primarily in rural Ontario to get conservatives elected.

Barbara
Reply

Don’t know where you get your information from. WCO is not a political organization. WCO posters come from all parties including independents.

Rural people are just collateral damage for those who are making lots of money off from renewable energy in Ontario and rural Ontarians have no say in what’s happening to them.

Phillip
Reply

yeah right… an organization founded and run by well known highly political Conservative Party operatives. Parker Gallant, an ex-Bay Street banker, and a well know Ottawa-based public relations spin-doctor. Those are not grassroots people, but astro-turfers taking you for a ride.

Barbara

You better check out the Bay Street banks that are in involved in financing renewable energy projects..

People from all parties pay Hydro bills and rural people from all parties have to put up with the wind turbines.

Phillip

Nothing wrong with banks financing renewable energy. We need more of it. If you do not want a wind turbine on your property, then do not put one on your property.

Jjoe

Is Parker Gallant related to Cheryl Gallant, M.P.?

Wind Concerns Ontario

That allegation is completely false. The news story you reference is from 2012; Elections Ontario did a full investigation and cleared Wind Concerns Ontario of any wrongdoing —completely. Your statement in fact is libelous; we demand a retraction immediately.

Phillip

“Your statement in fact is libelous; we demand a retraction immediately.” You need a better lawyer.

Wind Concerns Ontario

To defend against people dredging up four-year-old news stories?

Phillip

“To defend against people dredging up four-year-old news stories?”

No because if you have a lawyer that is telling you my statement is libel then he/she does not know what he is talking about. My statement was accurate and factual.

Wind Concerns Ontario

“That is political” in your original comment implies that WCO engages in political action, and that the allegations you reference were true; they are not.

Phillip

WCO is an extremely political organization. That is all WCO is. You are certainly not a science or academic based organization that wants to objectively discuss the issues.

Barbara
Reply

Is WCO registered as a corporate political organization?

What are your scientific and academic affiliations?

What are your scientific, academic, business qualifications?

Barbara

Big banks that loan money for renewable energy projects often are invested in these projects or other renewable projects after construction.

So finance and/or invest in renewable projects as well.

Parker Gallant
Reply

Hey Philip, exactly what is my political affiliation? I am pretty sure I know what yours is. I also have a good idea of your religion too! You worship at the church of the maggot, King David Suzuki.

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Like I said before turdbine buddy Cmon down to DD… I gotta sandwich board sign fer ya to wear around the municipality plus a megaphone so all of DD can hear your story of how we don’t know jack sh$t!!! You fear me cause I am right like the tens of thousands of rural ontarions being held hydro hostages…. go back to your parents basement or one of their farmhouses they own…. you don’t know 1/2 the peoples stories on this site…. you’re spoiled and ignorant and because you assume you’re right must mean everyone else is wrong…. so go hang out on a pro wind turdbine site you jack#ss!!!

Segue C
Reply

Don’t feed the trolls! Some are windbaggers trying to raise doubts and discredit, some are leftest psyops types who are positively gleeful when they can divide communities and undermine democracy, others are just sickos enjoying the shadenfreude; none are of any use to us and until we all recognize the fact that we are watching the rise of a totalitarian state and react appropriately we are not going to be much use to each other.

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Segue C. .. ya I hear ya but I won’t stand for turdbine buddies accusations that I know nothing about the effects of wind turdbines on people’s health…. turdbine buddy is riding the $$$$ wave sending ontarios economy down the drain and people’s health with it!!! Turdbinebuddy is connected to the GEA somehow but doesn’t have the guts to admit that he might be mistaken… like all leaseholders that are too proud or too scared to admit that the shat the bed on this deal…. if you partner with the government you can expect to get burned….. it’ll be a matter of time before Ole Katty Wynnd realizes that they can no longer subsidize this GEA and will then rewrite the payment structure to 1 cent per kwh!!! Alot of leaseholder don’t realize that the wind companies have first right of refusal on the lease at the end of their lease …. that means the wind companies can decide to stay another 20 years!!! And they will because theyre splitting 1 cent per kwh with the leaseholders…. Turdbinebuddy hates me cause I speak up for my family and friends…. cause I’m willing to sacrifice a little freedom to stop the cause…. cause I’m not scared to go up against multinational companies who trod on the rights of innocent people!!! I am an environmentalist at heart but I recognize a heard of lemmings heading for a cliff and I ain’t getting into this GEA heard mentality!!!

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Turdbine buddy has no regard for the environment nor people’s health… his statement that all is well where he lives is arrogant and shows how ignorant he is to other people’s plight…. again just like the liberals stating all is good with the GEA and it’s wind and solar projects that destroy ground water… masses of birds…. people are getting sick from these projects…. turdbine buddy refuses to actually admit there is problem cause he’s right and everyone else is wrong so that’s it…. turdbine buddy is not suffering from anything bit a fat bank account and as long as he’s ok then again everybody can screw off!!! There are no problems in turdbine buddies world it’s all fresh air!! I’d like to dump a dump truck of dead and rotting bird and bat carcasses on his front lawn!!!

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Yes folks the Nutinduttondunwich is pretty wound up today after driving thru Essex Kent GEA wind projects…. 20% of the turdbines are spinning all the rest have their blades angled to NOT CATCH ANY WIND!!!! must have filled the wind quota for the day! ! I need a stress reliever I’m going to practice my pitchfork skills on a hay bail! !!

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Thanks Barbara….. wow…. very interesting…. can you dig up a wind contract somewhere that states first right of refusal at the end of the lease goes to the wind companies??? I’ve asked several leaseholders out here if I could look at their contracts and the look I get you would’ve thought I had just asked them to donate a kidney!!!! Very secretive…… when I mention who has the first right of refusal on the lease for THIER LAND they just snear at me !!!

Barbara
Reply

Most likely they can’t show the contracts to anyone except their own lawyers or this could be a contract violation.

People who are going to have IWTs installed near them will have to pay for their own vibration and water testing prior to, during construction and after construction.

Barbara
Reply

Hog-tied and gagged too!

Once you sign they own you!

windbuddy
Reply

NUT, I am sure the leaseholders consider that the contents of the contract is none of your business. It is a binding agreement between two particular entities, not with you. A leaseholder has the ability to do whatever she/he wants to do on their property as long as it is legal. I am sure the property owners gave careful consideration to all aspects and outcomes of the contract before signing. I don’t think a property owner would put the lives of themselves, their families, their neighbours in harms way or would jeopardize a decrease in property value just to make a few bucks? Do you believe that leaseholders have no regard for the environment? I don’t know of any occupation that must work more closely with nature than farming . Renewable energy wind developments have now been part of the Ontario rural landscape for quite some time. Look to Chatham-Kent as a prime example of harmony between the people and the turbines. I don’t hear an outcry from people there about anything harmful. I checked the C-K website and see that population growth is being maintained, building permits are steady, home purchases are strong, and commercial activity is vibrant. With the federal mandate to deal with green house gases and climate change, you will never get any recognition or support from those in politics………….no matter who is in power. Both governments have made strong commitments on these fronts and taken these pledges to a level that will not be reversed no matter who is in power in the future. Remember the old days of smog advisories? Remember when there would be a yellow haze over the western sky from all the sulphur pollution from cars and coal fired electricity generators? Just take a minute to breath our clean, fresh air and quit wasting your time. .

Barbara
Reply

There has been opposition to wind turbines in C-K.

No smart property owner would sign a lease that includes a gag order and lets the tenant dictate to the land owner. That’s a red-flag right there.

These are commercial build leases and not just leasing your land to grow crops on.

Bert
Reply

Windbuddy
Coal was phased out years ago in Ontario.
Today nuclear provides 61%, hydro 25%, natural gas ( for intermittent wind backup) 7% and wind and solar 7%.
The big question here is; What dirty electricity generation in Ontario is replaced by wind?

Bert
Reply

Windbuddy said “I don’t think a property owner would put the lives of themselves, their families, their neighbours in harms way or would jeopardize a decrease in property value just to make a few bucks?”

Is this why the big farmers signed up all their farms BUT NOT THE HOME FARM??

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Bondy seeking turbine moratorium | Chatham Daily News
htwww.chathamdailynews.caBody/2016/08/18/councillor-says-province-has-moral-obligation-to-address-ground-water-issue

Nope all good in chatham Kent!!!!

Again turdbine buddy all is peaches and cream where you live you ignorant… arrogant…. self centered idiot!!!

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Thanks Parker you beat me to it!!! Good job!!! This turdbine buddy is so outa touch he’s not only a danger to the enviroment but to himself as well!!!!

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Turdbine buddy were you aware that constituents in CK were bringing in bottles of murky muddy water to this councillor business because their ground water is not good to drink and they need help???!!!
Turdbinebuddy I know YOUR water in YOUR taps is clean and potable right????? So there’s really no problem again… so everyone else can just screw off right!!!! You’re a real piece of work turdbine buddy! !! How bout you go down to CK there and tell the people there that it’s just their imagination!!!!

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Turdbine buddy and Ole Katty Wynnd know different…… just cause this is happening over there doesn’t mean it could happen here…. right!!!??? All good in windbuddies turdbine town…. again …..

notinduttondunwich
Reply

That picture in the article will be a scene near you in a few years rural ontario!! 550 Meters will be 250 meters soon enough….. as soon as there are no rural people left then it’s really not gonna matter right turdbine buddy!!!!

Bert
Reply

Windbuddy, you said “Remember when there would be a yellow haze over the western sky from all the sulphur pollution from cars and coal fired electricity generators” Sulphur from cars? Remember the last summer months? Wind was producing less than one percent of the electricity need! When power is needed most, on hot humid summer days, no wind power!
The yellow haze has moved to cheap labor countries. ( using dirty, carbon emitting coal to produce the steel to built your beloved wind turbines.)

ScepticalGord
Reply

Bert is correct, windbuddy.

I know it’s gonna hurt, but read it and weep.
Then, read it again and let the truth bring peace to your confused mind.

Tracy
Reply

I spent the afternoon touring Amherst Island. It is absolutely beautiful. It was heartbreaking to witness a man comforting a woman who was openly crying and sobbing as she watched the row of mature pines bordering her front yard on the north shore being cut down.
I asked the people cutting the trees why they were doing this. The response was that the water was eroding and undercutting the shoreline and the road needed to be widened. I also asked if maybe this was necessary to accommodate the transport of wind turbines on the island. They laughed. I also asked how much they were being paid to say that.
I travelled the entire island. This was the only road where the trees had been cut so far. There were approximately a dozen down at this time. There is also an area on the shoreline which has been graded and gravelled, that could be the loading ramp on to the island .
On the east end of the island was a land surveyor. Very few people were around.
Wow….

Barbara
Reply

Haven’t rural Ontarians already see enough of government “science”?

Amherst Island residents will have to prepare themselves using the best means available. Others can furnish moral support for them.

Phillip
Reply

many will do very well with the new source of revenue to the island. nothing like getting a more or less permanent annuity of income from leasing out a very small portion of your land.

Barbara
Reply

And tear up the Island to use a “small portion” of land?

Maybe it’s prudent to keep any testing records needed out of the government’s hands. Use private certified companies.

Barbara

What’s the Island soil type?

Just stay on your own property if any testing is done.

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Still not right Phillip. … these projects are being proven time after time to be unreliable and do not help the but harm the environment and it’s many inhabitants…. there was a post awhile back …
Moments of stupidity
Windmills don’t run on wind….
they run on subsidies….. ?

Phillip
Reply

there is no evidence that these projects have harmed the environment and many inhabitants, as you say. however, you guys certainly have all your talking points lined up. these projects are a windfall for the communities involved, as the bring much needed dollars into the community. every volt of electricity generated from alternative energy is on less generated from fossil fuels. that is positive for the environment. not sure what subsidies have to do with anything. the provide a good incentive to change behaviour and move toward renewable alternative energy. we need more of them. the fossil fuel and nuclear industries are and have been for decades some of the most subsidized industries on the planet, far outstripping any modest subsidies given to alternative energies.

Barbara
Reply

Wind and solar have ZERO reliability. What is so difficult to understand what this means.

Also wind patterns over regions do change. When and how much can’t be predicted.

Solar maps are available free online. Look for how much sunlight Ontario receives on average. This is not California.

Barbara
Reply

Subsidies are financial and/or political issues.

Wind Concerns Ontario
Reply

The resulting increase in Ontario’s electricity bills (about 20% due to wind power) is causing added strain on municipalities’ social services. See the recent news release from the United Way in Bruce-Grey as an example, and the Ontario Energy Board admission that over 500,000 electricity customers are now in a state of “energy poverty.” This does NOT constitute a “windfall” for communities.

Bert
Reply

In the first ( May 2016) report of Dianne Saxe, the new Environmental Commissioner of Ontario it says that the government made a mistake in choosing wind energy to fight climate change. Since electricity generation in Ontario is almost emissions free there is no environmental benefit in wind turbines. (Diane Saxe was pro- wind when she worked as a top lawyer for wind companies).

notinduttondunwich
Reply

Phillip….. do you work for a wind company… or are you in any shape or form affiliated with any GEA subsidy program? ?? Have you read any of my postings of what is going on in Europe??? How many times do you really need to be told that wind is ineffective….. environmentally disastrous….. economically crippling…. unhealthy. ….. etc…. why do you think this will not happen here…. history shows that …. history repeats itself!!

Colin
Reply

Phillip and Windbuddy,
Infrasound from wind turbines is KILLING people.
“Bringing much needed revenue to Amherst Island” it appears with the amount of anti wind signs on the island, people choose their health and well being over money. Afterall, what good is money to a dead person.
As for “proof”…There is much proof. Meet me on Cemetery Road and I’ll show you.

Phillip
Reply

killing people? that is a good one. these communities should be so luck to have the additional income, which is significant and is perpetual.

Phillip
Reply

“The resulting increase in Ontario’s electricity bills (about 20% due to wind power) is causing added strain on municipalities’ social services. ”

That is a completely ridiculous comment. Care to point or give us any credible analysis or studies that says what electricity bills have increased 20% in Ontario due to wind power. Complete nonsense and misinformation. You guys just throw these unsubstantiated statements up there with absolutely no proof and your followers just eat it up.

Barbara
Reply

Wind and solar operate at the whim of mother nature. Would you buy a vehicle or any kind of machine that only operated at the whim of mother nature?

My Hydro One bills have almost tripled. Must be some reason/reasons why this has happened. My natural gas bill has not. It’s only up a little.

Barbara
Reply

I use less power and house uses passive solar heat.

Have done about all than can be done to reduce power consumption.

Wind Concerns Ontario
Reply

From economics prof Ross McKitrick, wind power represents less than (then) 4 percent of Ontario’s power supply, but 20% of the cost.

Richard Mann
Reply

Here is a “time line” showing the history of Wind Turbine Noise problems, going back as far as 1979. Each entry provides documentation:
http://cdn.knightlab.com/libs/timeline/latest/embed/index.html?source=0Ak2bgr7C0nhPdGR3S1lEekU3T3p4ZDhUNDdRV2Y2ZkE&font=Bevan-PotanoSans&maptype=toner&lang=en&height=650

1979 “First complaints received from a dozen families within a 3km radius of turbine”.
1981 “Wind turbine operation creates enormous sound pressure waves”
1982 “Closed windows and doors do not protect occupants from LFN”
1982 “NASA research on human impacts provided to wind industry”
1985 “Hypothesis for infrasound-induced motion sickness”
1987 “Wind industry told that dB(A) unsuitable to measure LFN emissions from wind turbines”

2004 “Wind industry knows noise models inadequate” (from Vestas)

2011 “Vestas knew that low frequency noise from larger turbines needed greater setbacks”

Leave a Reply to windbuddyCancel reply

name*

email* (not published)

website