Archive for the ‘Enbridge wind farm’ Category

Winds Turbines and Health

September 28, 2009

Editor:

Fairchild Television contacted me in June and in July their film crew came to the Ripley wind farm to shoot a feature about the negative affects of living near wind turbines.

Originally over 12 minutes I edited it so only the English parts remain. If I can get it translated I will post more of the video.

I wish to thank Sherona and her crew for making the trip from Toronto, also Fairchild Television for the original production.

Top Posts Last Week

January 12, 2009

Editor:

If you make it through this top ten from last week and still think the “green movement” is honorable – you need to be deprogrammed.

Beware! The Green Shirts Are Here

Global Warming Video 1958

Sustainable Development: The Root of All Evil

Green Death?

Bonnechere Valley Township Loses Backbon

New World Order – Is This The FUTURE

Carbon Tax on Children?

Mind Maps – A Form of Child Porn?

UK e-mail law ‘attack on rights’

Carbon Offsets for Dummies Free Carbon Offsets-Live Guilt Free!

The Green Scam

The Enbridge Wind Farm Kincardine Ontario

Cash blown in the wind

DAVID ROCKEFELLER THANKS MEDIA FOR ITS Silence

WCO (Wind Concerns Ontario)

October 30, 2008

Wind Concerns Ontario Is  a coalition of 22 small rural groups opposing projects in their own municipalities.

Suncor wind farm Ripley

Suncor wind farm Ripley

Enbridge wind farm Kincardine Ontario

Enbridge wind farm Kincardine Ontario

Wind Concerns Ontario

South Algonquin declares moratorium on wind farms; No turbines to be built for 10 years, council says

October 22, 2008

Editor: Ever since I got involved in the STOP THE WINDMILLS fight, 2 years ago, I’ve continually said that it would be the folks in the eastern part of Ontario that would be the ones to show the way for the rest of the province. The people of the Ottawa Valley still know what’s important!

I salute the council!

To the councils in SW Ontario – it’s time you stood up for your constituents. The time has come to stop rolling over to the whims of the wind industry and the govt. Take a trip to Eastern Ontario, borrow some backbone and stand up for your constituents.

You don’t do this to your friends and neighbors!
Not for any amount of money

Enbridge wind farm Kincardine Ontario

Enbridge wind farm Kincardine Ontario

South Algonquin declares moratorium on wind farms; No turbines to be built for 10 years, council says

No wind-powered energy projects will be approved in South Algonquin for the next 10 years, the township’s council has declared.

The declaration, which was supported unanimously by councillors, came last Thursday night following a council meeting considering a proposal to construct a series of wind-power turbines in the hills along the Highway 60 corridor.

RES (Renewable Energy Systems) Canada wants to build 40 to 60 of the massive wind-power turbines in the area east of Algonquin Park. The plans, particularly for the construction of several of the turbines around pristine McCauley Lake, are unpopular with many seasonal and year-round residents. Several opponents of the project were present at the meeting, and gave a short presentation.

Cottager Brent Peterson, representing “the McCauley Lake Families,” said the 45 families on the lake just east of Algonquin are “the only community directly within the Whitney Wind farm study area.”

“We are united as a community, and we are asking for your protection,” he told council. The cottagers are asking that RES be required to locate its turbines, currently planned for the hills in full view of the quiet lake, out of sight and hearing distance from the lake. The PowerPoint presentation showed photographs of the lake’s vista, along with enhanced pictures showing what that vista would look like with wind turbines erected on the surrounding hills.

“These things are massive and they will completely change the experience of living on the lake,” Peterson said. “Your constituents are extremely anxious and very upset.” Peterson added that the McCauley Lake residents “know this is a big decision and that there are a lot of dollars involved.” But he said many of the people are considering leaving the area, or putting off plans to retire to their cottages if the turbines are built.

Harvey Leeman, a longtime Ontario Hydro employee and a McCauley Lake resident since 1949, and a hunter and fisherman as well as a forest manager, questioned both the assessed impact of the wind turbines on wildlife and the need for the electricity they will produce.

The RES proposal wants to take over “the heart of the last block of public land” in the Algonquin Park area, Leeman said. He pointed out that, while the company says each turbine has a one-acre footprint, “they want 6,000 acres of Crown land” for the project.

He pointed out that there are few local benefits from the turbines, either in jobs or in significant tax income and said RES estimates of job creation and local benefits come with heavy qualifications and are “greatly exaggerated.” The estimated $150,000 in tax income for South Algonquin would be lost in the decreased property values that the turbines would cause, he charged.

After the presentation, Councillor Richard Shalla presented a motion, seconded by Councillor Joe Florent, that would impose a moratorium on wind turbine approvals. After some discussion, the motion was amended to set the 10-year period, and a provision was added for a township-wide referendum on wind turbines, if council deems it necessary.

The motion was approved unanimously, and sparked loud and prolonged applause from the small group of people in the audience.

“I’ve been at council a long time and I’ve never had people clap for me,” Mayor Percy Bresnahan said, sparking laughter throughout the room.

Stephen Cookson, development manager for the RES Canada project, said he understands the reasoning behind the township’s move. He said RES remains committed to its plans.

“This is a very, very long process and we’re at the very beginning of the environmental assessment process.” He added that RES is confident that once the benefits of the project are understood by the community and council, “they will see it in a better light.” The company will hold more open house meetings, probably in the spring or summer of next year, to keep the public fully informed, Cookson said in a telephone interview from Vancouver. He stressed that RES wants to maintain “an open dialogue with the community of South Algonquin.”

“I think South Algonquin is being very prudent in waiting until all the information is in concerning the project. We hope that council will take as good a sounding as is possible” on the proposal.

Barry’s Bay This Week

22 October 2008

Windmills vs. NIMBYism – Toronto Star -Propagandist For the Wind Industry

October 20, 2008
Update: Response I received from the Toronto Star editorial board when I asked questions about one of their editorials. (found below)
If you live in rural Ontario you may want to consider canceling the Toronto Star. They’ll take your money but they won’t recognize you.

Response to my letter to the editorial board of the Toronto Star. If you live in the country you count for nothing.

Dear Mr. Stephens:
The “community” I am referring to is the Star’s community of readers.
Given that the Star is considered “the voice of the GTA” this would be
the community of readers in Toronto and the Greater Toronto area.
Certainly, many people in many communities would disagree with the views
put forward in this editorial opinion (as will any editorial). That is
their prerogative, as it is yours.
I will not be taking any further action on this editorial; nor will I be
providing you will “verification’ of the research done by the Star’s
editorial board as that is certainly not our practise.
I think the arguments put forward in the editorial speak for themselves
and it is beyond the scope of my role to question the conclusions drawn
in Star editorials.
As I told you, an editorial is an opinion based on the editorial board’s
interpretation of the facts at hand. While you may hold another opinion
I see no value in our debating these facts. I am not going to change
your mind about this issue and the Star’s editorial board is not likely
to reverse its position on this issue at this point in time.
Regards,
Kathy English

Kathy

I would like you to verify the research done and the content of the
research.

“This editorial view was arrived at after much research, thought and
debate by members of the Star’s editorial board, a group of six
journalists, under the direction of Editorial Page Editor Ian Urquhart,
who are charged with the responsibility of determining and expressing
the Star’s position on important matters affecting our community.
Because editorials represent the institutional voice of the newspaper,
they are never signed by the individuals who write them”.

I would also like someone to explain who’s community the article is
referring to.
I know many people, in many communities who would strongly disagree with
the position of the editorial board of the Toronto Star, including the
senior policy adviser for the Ministry of Energy and the ex-CEO of the
OPA.

I have invited the Provincial govt. to go through the information on my
site and point out any inaccuracies. To date, even though they are on my
site daily, they have never questioned or requested any changes.
I therefore request that your editorial staff go through my site as
well.

I want to know how they came to their conclusions.

The editorial board must be able to justify their position or it could
be considered propaganda.

Regards

Ron Stephens

Editor: The first casualty of war is TRUTH.
There is a war being waged against the rights of the citizens of Ontario by the environmental movement and the Toronto Star has become a propagandist for the movement.

1. a person involved in producing or spreading propaganda.
2. a member or agent of a propaganda.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)Cite This Source
I added the name of the writer to this article. Maybe the writer of this piece of propaganda didn’t want her name to be associated with such a piece of trash. I thought Tyler Hamilton (energy writer) could spew some garbage, but Ms. Gillespie has given Mr. Hamilton a new low to strive for.

SAVE THE PLANET-CUT LESS TREES-

CANCEL YOUR SUBSCRIPTION TODAY!

EDITORIAL TheStar.com | Opinion | Windmills vs. NIMBYism
Oct 20, 2008 04:30 AM – By Kerry Gillespie

After three years of effort, a $300 million wind farm that would have brought green power to Ontario has been cancelled. This is the latest casualty of a provincial planning process that just isn’t up to the task of ensuring that the best interests of all Ontarians prevail.

I guess the people forced from their homes and those living in misery because of wind turbines, don’t count in Ms. Gillespie’s Ontario.(added)


The province wants the clean energy that comes from projects like wind turbines. So much so that Energy Minister George Smitherman sent a $60 billion plan on how to meet the province’s electricity needs for the next two decades back to the drawing board to get more renewable energy and conservation into the mix.

According to the senior policy adviser I talked to – 10 billion spent on a real electrical system, would have provided Ontario with cost effective, clean, affordable electricity. He says we are dealing with politics. Try running your home or business on politics. At least 50 billion will be unnecessarily wasted ,causing your electric bill to skyrocket, and driving business from the province.(added)

Yet time and time again wind farms and other environmentally worthy projects run into the wall that is Ontario’s outdated, drawn-out planning process. Some manage to make it through. The wind farm planned for a township near Goderich didn’t.

The delays in getting through the process are difficult enough – often amounting to millions of wasted dollars – but the real problem comes when someone, and there’s always someone, wants to oppose the project. The NIMBYists are able to use the myriad planning steps – rezoning, official plan amendment, council approval, provincial environmental assessment and the spectre of an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board – as weapons in their fight.

As a spokesperson for the doomed Goderich wind farm said: “We’re a very conservative province, so it’s difficult to put anything anywhere.”

It’s not just wind farms the NIMBYists fight. They also oppose traditional generating stations. That forces Ontario to buy expensive – and often dirty – power from elsewhere.

And they fight urban “intensification” in the form of highrise buildings, which help curb sprawl.

In some European jurisdictions, municipalities are given the right to say where wind turbines can’t go. But they also have to say where they can go. In Ontario, it’s simply too easy to say no and hope to delay the project long enough that the developers give up and decide to give it a try in someone else’s backyard.

According to a  councilor involved in the Kingsbridge ll wind farm, he was told that any setback over 450 meters would not be tolerated. He was told to pass the setback or the township would be taken to the OMB and that the township would lose, costing the township $100,000. This, dispite the fact Kingsbridge l at 450 meters had already caused major problems for people living in the shadows of the turbines.(added)

The energy minister is right to call for more renewable energy. Now the provincial government must make sure its planning processes support that goal, even if it means someone may have to gaze upon a windmill from the living room window.

Because reality and truth no longer matter to the Toronto Star, I ask that you show your disapproval by boycotting the paper. Until they understand their duty to the public (seek and print the truth) they do not deserve your support.  I will be making a formal complaint to

Bureau of Accuracy/Public Editor

You can contact the Star’s Bureau of Accuracy and Public Editor by email at publiced@thestar.ca; by phone at 416-869-4949; or by fax at 416-869-4322

To cancel your subscription or to let the Star know how you feel –(added)Customer Service (including subscription inquiries, delivery issues, billing inquiries, vacation stops or other customer service inquiries or complaints)
Email: circmail@thestar.ca
Phone: 416-367-4500 or 1-800-268-9213

TheStar.com

Windmills vs. Nimbyism (another take on the article above)

Wind turbines cause health problems, residents say – CTV News

OPTIONS FOR COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS IN ONTARIO

Premier, Dalton McGuinty Talks About Renewable Energy For Ontario

Homeowners living near windfarms see property values plummet

Is Nimby the new “N” Word

Ted Cowan, Ontario Federation of Agriculture – Warns Farmers to be Careful When Dealing with the Wind Industry

August 19, 2008

Ted Cowan, a researcher with the Ontario Federation of Agriculture Farm Policy Research Group.

Ted Cowan cautioned farmers and landowners on lease agreements, providing an updated list of 30 recommendations from the OFA.

“I’ve seen over 30 leases, and there are problems with every one,” said Cowan, who outlined key considerations necessary to protect the rights of the farmers contemplating a wind power lease agreement.

“Don’t sign a lease until you have considered the choices and determined what is best for your farm operation for the next 20 years,” he said.

Cowan said some wind power companies are not giving a fair share of their profits, typically around 2 per cent, noting that the OFA recommendations call for a rent of 3 per cent for the first eight years, then going up to 8 or 10 per cent. The OFA also suggests that farmers contact their power distribution company to acquire their own right to connect.

Farmers were also cautioned on assessment and tax implications.

“It’s your farm – it’s your taxes,” said Cowan, noting that the landowner was ultimately responsible for taxes on their property. In addition, Cowan said there was no guarantee that the provincially imposed caps on assessments and taxes would remain in the future.

“I don’t know, taxes could be 50 times of what they are right now,” he said.

Outside of lease and legal considerations, there was detailed mention of more serious problems encountered by farmers with nearby wind power installations at the first meeting.

Cowan said a farmer had lost some cattle due to problems from stray voltage encountered right after a wind power development was commissioned, an incident that came to the attention of the OFA at the end of last year. Cowan declined to state the location of the incident, except to say it was in Ontario.

“If you put your hand on his barn wall you will have 83 volts going through your body,” said Cowan, who noted that voltage has a greater effect on cattle because of their large body size, causing changes in the animals watering and feeding habits.

“Yes, it could be a problem here,” said Cowan, speaking of Essex County’s numerous municipal drains and notorious wet soils, which can act as conductors of stray voltage.

To make the matter worse, Cowan said the farmer had not been getting help from the power companies or his municipality.

“Typically, it was who can run away from the responsibility the fastest,” he said.

The Essex Free Press

In Rural New York, Windmills Can Bring Whiff of Corruption'

August 18, 2008

Editor: I have been
writing and posting about the wind fraud for two years. It’s time for govt. of all stripes to come clean. What’s behind the wind industry?
Read the Green Agenda.

Corruption

Christinne Muschi for The New York Times

Kathy Laclair of Churubusco, N.Y., dislikes the noise from the wind turbine blades and says their shadows give her vertigo.
More Photos >

‘In Rural New York, Windmills Can Bring Whiff of Corruption’);

‘The wind industry has arrived in force in upstate New York, but some residents say the companies have brought with them an epidemic of corruption and intimidation.’);

Published: August 17, 2008

BURKE, N.Y. — Everywhere that Janet and Ken Tacy looked, the wind companies had been there first.



Christinne Muschi for The New York Times

To some upstate towns, wind power promises prosperity. Others fear noise, spoiled views and the corrupting of local officials.
More Photos »

Dozens of people in their
small town had already signed lease options that would allow wind
towers on their properties. Two Burke Town Board members had signed
private leases even as they negotiated with the companies to establish
a zoning law to permit the towers. A third board member, the Tacys
said, bragged about the commissions he would earn by selling concrete
to build tower bases. And, the Tacys said, when they showed up at a
Town Board meeting to complain, they were told to get lost.

“There were a couple of times when they told us to just shut up,”
recalled Mr. Tacy, sitting in his kitchen on a recent evening.

Lured
by state subsidies and buoyed by high oil prices, the wind industry has
arrived in force in upstate New York, promising to bring jobs, tax
revenue and cutting-edge energy to the long-struggling region. But in
town after town, some residents say, the companies have delivered
something else: an epidemic of corruption and intimidation, as they
rush to acquire enough land to make the wind farms a reality.

“It really is renewable energy gone wrong,” said the Franklin County
district attorney, Derek P. Champagne, who began a criminal inquiry
into the Burke Town Board last spring and was quickly inundated with
complaints from all over the state about the wind companies. Attorney
General Andrew M. Cuomo agreed this year to take over the investigation.

“It’s a modern-day gold rush,” Mr. Champagne said.

Mr.
Cuomo is investigating whether wind companies improperly influenced
local officials to get permission to build wind towers, as well as
whether different companies colluded to divide up territory and avoid
bidding against one another for the same land.

The industry
appears to be shying away from trying to erect the wind farms in more
affluent areas downstate, even where the wind is plentiful, like Long
Island.

But in the small towns near the Canadian border, families
and friendships have been riven by feuds over the lease options, which
can be worth tens of thousands of dollars a year in towns where the
median household income may hover around $30,000. Rumors circulate
about neighbors who can suddenly afford new tractors or trucks.
Opponents of the wind towers even say they have received threats; one
local activist said that on two occasions, she had found her windshield
bashed in.

Full Article from the NY Times

Wind turbines 'are ruining our quality of life'

July 25, 2008

Editor:

The problems with wind turbines being placed near homes has been known for years.

The Govt of Ontario is well aware of the problems, because they have volumes of information on the subject, but have chosen to ignore it. They
are guilty of putting the health of residents of Ontario at risk.

A fact that can no longer be disputed.

Dr. Ian Gemmill, Kingston’s medical officer of health, said – “that though there are concerns about low-level noise, appearance and stress caused by the turbines, research has suggested that those effects don’t cause long-term health impacts after people are no longer living near wind farms”.(People forced from their homes or stay and suffer ill health)

Board member Vicki Schmolka told the board that she wasn’t sure that
she agreed with Gemmill’s conclusion. She indicated that she felt there
are health concerns associated with the turbines that the board should
investigate further.

The abuse of the residents of Ontario Must stop NOW!

A moratorium on any further construction of wind turbines must be put in place, until it can be proven by Heath Canada that they are safe for the public to live near.
For safety reasons, there are no smoking laws, seat belt laws, life jacket laws etc.etc.etc.
Until the studies have been done. No more Turbines.

By Martin Beckford

The majority of people living near wind turbines believe that the noise they make is ruining their health and quality of life, a report has revealed.

Neighbours also claim that the constant hum and the loud “whooshing” sound made by the blades in high winds is destroying the value of their homes.

A survey of people whose homes are situated within 1.2 miles of turbines has shown that three-quarters of them feel that the noise has damaged their quality of life while four out of five say it has affected their health.

Those who said they were made ill by the sound of the wind farms, which are designed to benefit the environment, described conditions ranging from migraines and palpitations to depression.

Three quarters said their sleep was disturbed by the noise and some claimed that they had been forced to stay in bed and breakfasts to get a proper night’s rest or to sell their homes at reduced prices to get away from the area.

One of the respondents to the survey, carried out by a family doctor, claimed that the noise was “like Chinese water torture”, while others said they could “see no future” and “dare not sleep at home”.

Dr Amanda Harry, a Plymouth GP who compiled the report after studying

the effects of wind turbine noise for several years, wrote: “What this shows is that there are a number of people suffering from the consequences of noise from the wind turbines.

“I’m sure that the cases mentioned here are the tip of the iceberg and further independent investigation is warranted.

There is much concern within communities that if one is seen to complain about the noise and if they decide to move away, their properties will be difficult to sell and possibly devalued as a result. They feel they are in a ‘Catch-22’ situation.”

Some wind farms are situated just a few hundred yards from homes but Dr Harry believes that until independent research is carried out, no turbines should be built closer than 1.5 miles from the nearest dwelling.

Dr Harry wrote: “There are many people living near wind turbines who are suffering from problems with their health. The noise produced from the wind turbines is an extremely complex one and I feel that it is the complexity of the noise and vibration which causes the disturbance.

“From my discussions with people suffering from ill-health who live near wind farms, it seems that the symptoms suffered can occur up to a mile from the wind farm.”

From the Telegraph

Wind Farms – Lake Huron Ontario – Video

May 31, 2008

Editor:

Tried to post a comment on this video by the Windsor Star but it wouldn’t accept comments so I had to bring it here.

These comments will make sense, or not, after you view the video.

The reporter in the video says the wind will power 440,00 homes. According to the ISO – for planning purposes they are rated at 10% of capacity or 44,00 homes. Big difference.

Ernie Marshall, in the blue coveralls, and his wife have moved. Ernie was suffering from health problems he didn’t have before the arrival of the turbines. Ernie says his health is slowly returning and his doctor is happy with his progress since he moved. Both Ernie and his wife say that after two years of living near the turbines,they are finally enjoying uninterrupted sleep. The neighbors Ernie said goodbye to are still suffering from noise, stray voltage and flicker, not to mention the flashing lights on top of the turbines every night.

The gentleman in the brown coveralls has moved as well. After the problems at the Epcor site he didn’t want to be around when the Enbridge site was completed. He is well aware of the problems created by wind turbines and feared he might not find a buyer after the turbines arrived.

Neither of these people wanted to move, but felt they had no choice.

Every wind farm in southern Ont. has impacted families in a negative way.

Bob Simpson, the gentleman from Enbridge says they will respond quickly to solve any problems. Unless Mr. Simpson plans on moving the turbines farther away from peoples homes there is nothing he or his company can do. For the next twenty years people will suffer the consequences of bad planning and greed.

Mr. Simpson mentions reducing emissions. Nowhere on the planet can I find any evidence of emission reductions from the use of wind turbines.

Germany has more wind turbines than anywhere else. They are in the process of building 20 plus coal plants. I would say their emissions are about to take a big jump. Wind doesn’t seem to have done Germany much good.

The number of fossil fuel plants closed as a direct use of wind energy – o – Zero – none – zip

Wind energy has doubled in Ont. Does that mean we are twice as stupid as we should be.

When the govt. the industry and the media are all saying how great wind energy is,it’s hard to accept the reality that is the wind industry – and that’s exactly what they are counting on.

A quote from a person living at the Suncor wind farm Ripley. When asked how it was living near the turbines. “I’ll tell you how it is, our life is shit since the wind farm came.”

Ripley has a 700 meter setback, The Enbridge and Epcor wind farms have a 450 meter setback.

A video of the Ripley wind farm can be found under videos at top of page.

Do some research on your own. Theres nothing on TV anyway.

.

Video by the Windsor Star

.

Critic says new Enbridge fee 'outrageous'

February 18, 2008

Editor: This is what happens when business has too much influence over govt. The OEB has, for all intents and purposes, overturned a Supreme Court Decision.

Enbridge is building a huge wind farm in Bruce County Ont. They said they want to be good corporate neighbors. I feel better about Enbridge after reading this – don’t you.

The Provincial Govt. just handed out 25 million of your tax dollars to universities to try and figure out how to integrate the energy from wind farms into the grid.

There is a video link of the story at the bottom of the page.

Time for the people of this province to show some

OUTRAGE!

Critic says new Enbridge fee ‘outrageous’

Enbridge is set to charge its Ontario customers a new fee to help pay the costs of an out-of-court settlement. In 2004, the Supreme Court ruled against the natural gas company — for charging unfair fees.

The Supreme Court found that the company had billed illegal late-payment penalties from 1994 to 2002. The fees had been approved by the Ontario Energy Board (OEB).

The company agreed to pay $22 million in a settlement, but the OEB said Enbridge now has the right to reclaim that money, even if it’s from the same customers it overcharged.

Gord Garland, who launched the lawsuit against Enbridge over the late fees, said the company is again mistreating its customers.

“It’s outrageous that a company engaged in and essentially convicted of a criminal act would then ask its customers to pay for that act,” he told CTV News.

In the Supreme Court ruling, Justice Frank Iacobucci wrote that “the late-payment penalties were collected in contravention of the Criminal Code,” which trumps any OED ruling.

The OEB has also approved the new fee. In response to questions from CTV News, the OEB issued a statement explaining its decision. It noted that:

  • Costs had been incurred prudently;
  • Enbridge was acting in accordance with provincial government guidelines;
  • The late payment penalties Enbridge was charging were approved by the Board at that time; and,
  • the Ontario Superior Court had ruled in favour of Enbridge on two prior occasions, before being overruled by the Supreme Court of Canada.

Lawyers said that because Enbridge is a utility, it’s guaranteed ‘cost recovery.’

“What the OEB does is determine what the costs were and allow the utility to recover them from the customers,” said regulatory expert George Vegh.

The new fee may be only a few dollars, but Garland said customers will be furious.

“That is money being taken out of Enbridge’s customers’ pockets and being put into Enbridge’s pockets,” he said.

Link to video

CTV