Archive for the ‘energy issues for canada’ Category

Wolfe Island Residents for the Environment

March 2, 2008

Read Ministry of Energy’s proposed changes i.e. all the legal requirements that will enable wind and other energy projects to be approved and erected without public consultation, under what they are calling “the substituted process”.

All Ministries apparently should abdicate all their regulatory and approval responsibilities in favour of this new “substituted process”, and in this new perfect, energy driven world, the Ontario Energy Board (OEB) will become the sole approval authority for siting and environmental issues.  The new “Environmental Assessment Report”, or EAR, as they are calling it, will take care of all these permitting delays by removing municipalities and other stakeholders from the entire process in the name of the public good – ie must have new energy at all costs.  Our democratic rights are being taken away from us. Please write to the Ministry of Energy to make known your position to this proposed change.

http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/index.cfm?fuseaction=electricity.reports
Go to – Agency Review Panel: Phase 2 Report

Visit Wolfe Island Residents for the Environment

Liberals would set up billion-dollar fund to help manufacturing: Dion

January 18, 2008
Editor:
There will be a Federal Election in the not to distant future and there’s no one to vote for. Sad times ahead for Canada. The Liberals want to give up our sovereignty to the UN and the Conservatives want to give up our sovereignty through the Trilateral agreement-combining Canada,the USA and Mexico into one nation. The other parties are just variations of the two main parties. All seem hell bent for leather to destroy Canada.
Dion wants you to believe that investing your tax dollars in “Green Technologies” will resurrect the ailing manufacturing industry in Ontario. The exact opposite will be the result. In order for our manufacturing industry to survive and thrive, it must be competitive. We need cost effective energy sources, to hang on to the industry we have and encourage new industry to come to Ont.
Mr. Dion what do you have in mind for us.
Should we invest in bio fuels? Decision-makers in the climate change field have little faith in biofuels as a low-carbon technology, the World Conservation Union (IUCN)
How about wind-According to Premier, Dalton McGuinty
Ontario Hansard – 19-April2006
“Wind turbines: We are investing heavily in those, but again, those are an expensive form of electricity and they’re not reliable”
Solar-Premier, Dalton McGuinty says-When it comes to solar, those tend to be expensive as well.”
“Drive up the price of energy and drive industry from Ontario”.
Is that your election platform Mr. Dion?
I will always be an environmentalist but I will never be “Green”
You won’t be getting my vote Mr. Dion. I won’t vote for a carbon tax con man

Liberals would set up billion-dollar fund to help manufacturing: Dion

HAMILTON, Ont. – A Liberal government would establish a $1-billion fund to help manufacturers move into green technologies, Stephane Dion pledged Friday.

The Liberal leader said his proposed Advanced Manufacturing Prosperity Fund would help pay for research and development projects aimed at boosting the hard-pressed manufacturing sector.

He told a Hamilton Chamber of Commerce meeting he has met business and union leaders, premiers and environmentalists over the last year to discuss the troubled manufacturing sector.

“They all bring different viewpoints to the table, but there is consensus on one thing: they all want to see Canada’s manufacturing sector become a world leader in green technologies,” he said. “The . . . fund is designed to help accomplish precisely that”.

Thousands of factory jobs have disappeared in recent years and Dion says it’s time to go beyond simple tax corporate breaks.

“Tax cuts alone are not enough,” he said. “The federal government must partner with the manufacturing sector as it adjusts to recent economic shocks. That requires strategic investment”.

In addition to the prosperity fund, the Liberals would provide tax credits to support private research which doesn’t translate into immediate profits.

“Innovation is essential to the survival of our industries, but it can be an expensive undertaking,” he said. “We want every company that puts money into R and D to be rewarded for innovating.

“By offering incentives for companies to continue investing in R and D, the Liberal party will encourage all companies to innovate, even if that innovation does not lead to immediate profitability.”

He said this will encourage more private funding for research and development and help Canadian companies become leaders in green technologies.

Dion took a swipe at Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservative government, saying it’s not willing to build a greener economy.

“If he plans to watch the manufacturing sector crumble instead of helping it to evolve, then he will not live up to anybody’s conception of good leadership.”

CBC

ENVIRONMENTAL AND WILDLIFE GROUPS CHARGE INDUSTRY BIAS

January 17, 2008

Editor:
The same thing is going on here in Ont. Both gov., and industry get away with too much.  Where is the media?  Before you buy your next newspaper, magazine or turn on the TV news, ask yourself a question, who is your media working for?
If you don’t think you are getting honest, even, two-sided information from your media, then stop supporting that media, both with your dollars and your eyes.

PRESS RELEASE: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

http://www.windaction.org/releases/13645

ENVIRONMENTAL AND WILDLIFE GROUPS CHARGE INDUSTRY BIAS IN KEMPTHORNE’S SELECTION OF MEMBERS FOR HIGH-LEVEL COMMITTEE ON WIND POWER AND WILDLIFE

Membership of Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory Committee violates FACA

WASHINGTON D.C. (January 17, 2008) – In a letter submitted today (http://www.windaction.org/documents/13651), environmental and wildlife groups [1] called on Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne to revamp the membership of the Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory Committee of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. The current membership violates the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which governs the establishment of federal advisory committees.

“Secretary Kempthorne has clearly skewed the composition of the committee in favor of the industry representatives while ignoring leading experts on critical wildlife impacts,” said Eric R. Glitzenstein of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal, the law firm representing the groups. “This is precisely the kind of committee composition that the Federal Advisory Committee Act was designed to prohibit,” he added.

he Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory Committee was formed to provide advice and recommendations to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service in developing effective measures to avoid or minimize impacts to wildlife and their habitats related to land-based wind energy facilities (see Fed. Reg. 72:11373 (March 13, 2007)). Secretary Kempthorne announced the appointment of 22 people to the committee on October 24, 2007.

Under FACA the committee must have balanced points of view represented and the functions to be performed, and will not be inappropriately influenced by any special interest. In their letter, the groups assert that the committee’s overall composition clearly violates FACA in several ways.

* No committee members possess research expertise or publication record regarding bats, nor direct knowledge or experience involving bat interactions with wind turbines.

This is a glaring omission in light of recent reports[2] and Congressional testimony [3] on the issue of massive bat mortality at wind energy facilities. For example, a recent study estimated that up to 111,000 bats may be killed [4] every year should only 3,868 MW of wind turbines be constructed within the Mid-Atlantic Highlands regions of VA, WV, MD, and PA. As of today, in those states, there are over 6,300 MW of wind turbines under study for interconnection to the regional electricity grid.

* The committee lacks the requisite expertise regarding bird impacts, especially with respect to effects on migratory birds using the Appalachian mountain ridges in the eastern U.S., despite the fact that dozens of planned wind projects are slated for this part of the country.

* No committee members have significant research, scientific, or regulatory experience with wind energy development and associated wildlife impacts resulting from onshore wind projects in the eastern U.S.

According to the letter, these scientific and technical omissions are especially troubling in light of the many individuals on the committee who either expressly represent or are clearly aligned with the interests of the wind industry.

The groups call on Secretary Kempthorne to appoint appropriate experts to the committee who are experienced in wind energy development in the eastern U.S., where thousands of industrial wind turbines are proposed, and many are already in operation. Several highly-qualified candidates who applied for committee membership but were not appointed are listed in the letter. Their expertise includes both bats and birds and extensive knowledge of nocturnal migration. In addition, the groups encourage the appointment of experts with research experience in forest fragmentation impacts, particularly in the eastern forest region.

CONTACT:

Kieran Suckling, Center for Biological Diversity, (520) 275-5960

Eric Glitzenstein, Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal, (202) 588-5206

Lisa Linowes, Industrial Wind Action Group, (603) 838-6588 (llinowes@windaction.org)

###

[1] Center for Biological Diversity; The Humane Society of the United States; Hawk Migration Association of North America; Industrial Wind Action Group; D. Daniel Boone; Maryland Conservation Council; Save Our Allegheny Ridges; Friends of Blackwater Canyon; Protect the Flint Hills; Chautauqua County Citizens for Responsible Wind Power; Green Berkshires, Inc.; Juniata Valley Audubon; Ripley Hawk Watch; Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound; and Wildlife Advocacy Project.

[2] http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=11935

[3] http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/index.php?option=com_jcalpro&Itemid=32&extmode=view&extid=47

[4] http://www.windaction.org/documents/11179

Ontario Great Lakes wind power

January 15, 2008
Editor:
Letter I sent to Tyler Hamilton who wrote the article below
Tyler
I just read your piece in the Star.
Helimax is a member of CanWEA, they both have a vested interest in wind farm development. It would be reasonable to expect a qualifier in the story.
When people read “could generate up to 47,000 megawatts of clean electricity” they are unfortunately under the impression 47,000 MW will be produced, even though it is very improbable they will ever produce this amount. There is no mention of the natural gas plants that will have to be constructed in order to provide power when the wind is not blowing at capacity, which is most of the time.
The entire renewable energy program set out by the Ont. govt. is based almost entirely on assumptions and possibilities, not on sound engineering practices. It is also a product of Maurice Strong and the e8. In fact the entire Ont generation system is being orchestrated by the guidelines set out by the e8. Marie LeGrow, who is the head project coordinator for wind farms, at the Ministry of the Environment, wrote the manual for the e7 before it became the e8
This story should have been a press release from the govt and the wind industry. When you attach your name you legitimize the fraud that is being perpetrated on the people of Ont. That is unfortunate.
Please read what McGuinty has to say about wind,solar and natural gas.
premier-dalton-mcguinty-talks-about-renewable-energy

Thank you for your time
Ron Stephens
Editor
Blowing Our Tax Dollars on Wind Farms
Ontario to approve Great Lakes wind power

 

DAVID COOPER/TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO
Melancthon wind farm west of village of Shelburne, Ont.

Email Story document.write(‘Email story’); Email story

Email the author Email the author

Several offshore projects are waiting in the wings

Jan 15, 2008 04:30 AM


Energy Reporter
Ontario is preparing to lift a controversial moratorium on the development of offshore wind projects in the Great Lakes that has been in place for nearly 14 months, the Toronto Star has learned.

A Ministry of Natural Resources official says the department is “getting ready” to make an announcement and that new minister Donna Cansfield is “anxious to demonstrate leadership in the area.”

Jamie Rilett, a spokesperson in Cansfield’s office, confirmed that the ministry is currently revisiting the moratorium. He said a decision would be made “shortly.”

Industry sources also confirmed the moratorium’s end is imminent.

Offshore wind energy, while typically associated with ocean projects, offers significant opportunities in the Great Lakes. According to one study by Helimax Energy Inc., the strong and consistent winds typically over the lakes could generate up to 47,000 megawatts of clean electricity – nearly double Ontario’s existing power capacity.

The ministry put a halt to all offshore development in November 2006 to give the government more time to study the potential environmental impact of such projects on bats, butterflies, aquatic species and bird migration routes.

But the moratorium caught some wind developers off guard, particularly those trying to raise money for their proposed projects.

The wisdom of halting development was also called into question when it was discovered that some U.S. states, such as Ohio, were actively moving forward with offshore projects in Lake Erie despite the Ontario policy.

The moratorium followed a protest against an offshore wind project near Leamington, Ont., in September 2006. Nearly 300 residents showed up to a council meeting to protest a 119-turbine project planned by developer Southpoint Wind Power. Council unanimously rejected Southpoint’s proposal and urged the ministry to come up with guidelines that would help small communities evaluate offshore projects.

“There were a number of serious concerns,” said deputy mayor Robert Schmidt, explaining that many residents saw negative impacts on lake navigation, bird and butterfly migration, recreational boating and fishing.

“The biggest issue to most residents was how it affected their view of the lake, which is really only the last natural view we have in our area.”

Schmidt said a number of offshore proposals still wait in the wings.

“The majority of people aren’t against the idea, as long as it’s located in an area where it doesn’t cause problems.”

Energy consultant Paul Bradley, manager of PJB Energy Solutions and former vice-president of generation at the Ontario Power Authority, said offshore projects hold great potential but are also a huge technical challenge.

“They’re all-or-nothing projects,” he said. “You’ve got to collect all that power from each turbine, aggregate it, and then bring it in efficiently through an underwater cable.”

The best wind resources tend to be far from where power is consumed.

One of the biggest challenges is to bring wind-generated energy to communities in southern Ontario without breaking the bank on building high voltage transmission lines, which cost about $3 million a kilometre to construct.

Toronto Hydro Corp. has considered an offshore wind project in Lake Ontario near the Scarborough Bluffs. That wind farm would have a capacity of up to 200 megawatts.

“In the general context of developing wind power in the province, (lifting the moratorium) would be a great step forward,” said Joyce McLean, chair of the Canadian Wind Energy Association and Toronto Hydro’s manager of green energy services.

A more ambitious project by Trillium Power Energy Corp. would involve 140 turbines erected along a shallow stretch of Lake Ontario, about 15 kilometres offshore from Prince Edward County. The wind farm would have a capacity of 710 megawatts, the largest in Ontario.

Wind energy is a major part of the McGuinty government’s plan to double by 2025 the amount of electricity that comes from renewable resources.

The Ministry of Energy announced last August it had directed the Ontario Power Authority to procure another 2,000 megawatts of renewable power, a large portion of which is expected to be generated from wind.

Toronto Star

Tories oppose carbon tax

January 7, 2008

Editor:
Why the big push from the advisory committee? The scam that is global warming is starting to fall apart. Talk of global cooling is starting to appear. Carbon tax has nothing to do with global warming. Never did. It’s about control and cash.
That’s what it should be called, “Control and Cash” not “Cap and Trade”.

I’m not a big fan of Stephen Harper or his govt, I am however, a big fan of Canada and it’s people. Carbon trading will have adverse affects on the economy and the jobs people depend on and therefore it should not be implemented. I am therefore asking that you encourage Mr. Harper to base his policy on up to date science.

No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
Christine Stewart,
fmr Canadian Minister of the Environment

Tories oppose carbon tax

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has flatly opposed the idea of a carbon tax in the past, as has Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion.

On Monday, the federal Liberals seemed to be more receptive to the idea.

At a press conference in Ottawa, long-time Liberal and environmental activist John Godfrey said his party currently favours a carbon trading system, but will keep an open mind about carbon taxes and is waiting to see what research emerges on the topic.

The Conservatives, however, stuck to their position.

Environment Minister John Baird said Monday that he welcomes the report’s call for fixing a price on carbon, but would not consider a carbon tax. He said his government is instead working to regulate industry emissions by pushing for major polluters to significantly reduce their emissions by 2010 and encouraging an eventual carbon trading system in North America.

“What we’re not going to do is be like Stéphane Dion and the Liberals who constantly change their position and their policy,” Baird told reporters outside the House of Commons, referring to the Liberal’s apparent softening stance on a carbon tax.

“I understand the Liberals are now entertaining dumping their current policy — policy No. 8 by my count — and adopting a completely new policy. Every time a report comes out, you can’t change your mind.”

Murray said he is optimistic that Parliament will support carbon prices and measures like carbon taxes and carbon trading.

“It’s time to move the discussion forward because there isn’t a realistic case that we have seen yet where we can achieve reductions without a price [on carbon],” Murray said.

“You’ll now quietly hear people talking very seriously about cap and trade systems,” he added. “Our job [as an advisory panel] is to push government, not just the governing party, but Parliament and Canadians.”

‘Significant’ impact on Ontario, Alberta

Murray noted that the costs of a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system could particularly be “significant” on Alberta’s oil producers and Ontario’s manufacturing sector.

But he stressed that in the development of any new policy, there would be investments in green technologies that would ultimately benefit both provinces significantly.

He said any policy would have to be created to ensure all regions are treated fairly, and that Canada’s industry as a whole doesn’t suddenly find itself on an “unlevel playing field” with the rest of the world.

Murray said the development of a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system must include industry officials, environmentalists and representatives from all regions of the country.

Representatives from all sectors were already involved in the creation of the panel’s report, he said, noting that 65 groups were consulted and extensive economic modelling was done.

GDP wouldn’t be seriously affected

David McLaughlin, CEO of the advisory panel, said the report has concluded that Canada can feasibly reach its 2050 target of a 65 per cent emissions reduction, and that reaching this target will not be detrimental to the Canadian economy as a whole.

Canada has enough green technology in place to meet the goals, although the development of more technology would be encouraged, according to the panel’s findings.

“Our findings suggest in the long run the overall effect on Canada’s gross domestic product will not be significant, amounting to the equivalent of approximately one to two years of lost growth of GDP between now and 2050,” McLaughlin said at the press conference with Murray.

While the Liberals applauded parts of the report, they accused the Conservatives of putting constraints on the advisory panel, giving it a mandate to work with the Conservative government’s environmental targets, instead of the targets proposed under the international Kyoto Protocol.

“The report reminded us once again that this Conservative government has unilaterally abandoned Canada’s international legal obligations,” Godfrey said.

The Kyoto Protocol, which Canada signed under a Liberal government in 1998, requires that the country reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by six per cent from 1990 levels by 2012.

The Conservative government created new environmental goals in April 2007 that see Canada meeting its Kyoto commitments years behind schedule. Under the new plan, Canada’s overall emissions will be cut by up to 65 per cent by 2050 and 20 per cent cut by 2020, all based on 2006 levels.

McLaughlin said the panel used the new targets because they are feasible and focused on the long-term, giving Canada enough time to make necessary changes.

Kyoto’s targets are too focused on the short-term, McLaughlin said.

CBC

Industrial wind turbine development to end

November 6, 2007

From the editor

I would like to thank the President of France for using his office to do the right thing for his people. The  people of France have worked very hard to get the govt. to change its position on wind energy. The people of Canada, the USA and every other country that is being bastardized by bad energy policy need to stand and be counted, just like the people of France.

Will our media even acknowledge this story?

A job well done President Sarkozy and a special thank you to all those who worked so hard to shine the light on the reality of the wind industry.

France, Press Releases

Sarkozy announces new wind turbine policy

Industrial wind turbine development to end in rural and wild areas

The Sustainable Environment Federation (FED), with the heritage and countryside associations who demonstrated in Paris on October 6 against industrial wind energy, are pleased by President Sarkozy’s redirection of French policy concerning wind turbines and renewable energy.

In his comments at the closure of the « Grenelle de l’environnement », the president of the republic announced the end of the « rush » that has characterized French policy on wind turbines up to now and that ultimately means degradation of the environment. New wind turbines will be installed first in industrial farm fields and far from emblematic locales.

Eric Rosenbloom of  Kirby Mountain corrected a term in the translation, which you should read, les friches industrielles are “brownfields” not “industrial farm fields“. (That limits development even more!)

In an improvisation that was not in the prepared text provided to the press, M. Sarkozy turned to José-Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, and added : « Frankly, when I see some European countries, it doesn’t make me envious ».

The president of the republic also announced acceleration of research into energies of the future.

This new policy marks the end of industrial wind turbine installations in rural and wild areas. This is a relief for the 800 villages and 52 departments represented in the October 6 demonstration. It is also a powerful contribution to the image of France and shows Europe that an energy policy can reconcile the fight against global warming and respect for the countryside and every life.

*******

The 1500 demonstrators on October 6 brought six demands. Many of them have been accepted : publicize the true numbers of wind energy development (M. Borloo [environment minister] has committed to this), protect public health from wind turbine nuisance, protect the cultural and natural heritage of France, restore peace in the villages, commit to an effective energy strategy.

The sixth concerns the financial scandal of the price of wind-generated electricity. The highly elevated price encourages the production of intermittent energy which does not promote the reduction of greenhouse gases. It will lead to speculative pressure for the few areas in France that meet the criteria of the new policy.

Just as the president announced that the policy of supporting biofuels will be reviewed, price support for wind turbines needs to be reviewed.

Fédération Environnement Durable
Les Associations de Patrimoine

Télécharger le communiqué de presse en Français
Download this translation

George Carlin Tells It Like It Is

August 27, 2007

The big boys have figured out how to get more of your money, using the wind industry as the front this time.

They have decided to scare you into thinking “Global Warming” will wipe out the world if you don’t do and believe what they tell you to do and believe. Has the world become this stupid. Who polluted the world in the first place. The same guys that are now telling you they are going to save it. What a load of bunk.

Watch for the ENRON logo in the clip. They are the ones who got natural gas deregulated. They are the ones who got the wind industry started. They are the ones who screwed California over.

They were a fraud. I’ll let you take it from there.

The video explains what you, in your heart, already know.

The language is a little rough but the message, unlike GORE and SUZUKI, is real

Regardless if you live in Canada the USA, Europe or anywhere else on this planet, click to listen to George tell it like it is.

George Carlin on You Tube

60 Hours of Wind Power in Ontario

July 25, 2007

I tracked the wind farm production from 1am on the 23rd of July 2007 until noon July 25th 2007.

At 9am today the four wind farms in Ont. with a total capacity of  396 MWs were producing zero MWs of electricity.

Over the 60 hrs. they produced a total of 1140 MWs. or 19 MWs per hr. which is about 4.8% of the plated capacity.

Many of those hours no electricity was produced and many more were in the 1 to 8 MW range.

The best production was on July 23 between the hrs. of 1am and 6am., the very time when power consumption is at its lowest.

Even though we may not require the power between 1am and 6am we must still buy it at a premium price.

Wind power started as an experiment and has since turned into, thanks to Enron, an investment scheme that has cost taxpayers billions and ruined the lives of the people living near the wind farms.

400 MW of Wind Capacity Produces O MW of Power

February 27, 2007

At noon today I checked how much power was being produced by the wind farms in Ontario. The govt. has this idea that if they spread the wind farms around the province wind farms will produce power. Their logic is that it has to be windy somewhere. Port Burwell = O MW Kingsbridge l = O MW Amaranth = O MW and last but not least Princefarm = O MW. Lets add that up now. 400 plus MW of wind capacity producing O MW of power at noon today.

Mr. Dwight Duncan our esteemed Energy Minster wants more wind power. Maybe it’s time Duncan and McGuinty had a brain scan. I think most of the wind in Ontario is blowing around between their ears.

Time to wake up people.

Time to raise a little hell………….or you can do nothing, but please don’t bitch and complain when your hydro bills go through the roof. This province doesn’t belong to McGuinty, Duncan or the wind industry, it belongs to you. Please act accordingly.

Remember when Bush said he knew what he was doing in Iraq. McGuinty and Duncan have ignored all the advice from the experts to follow their green dream and if it’s not stopped it is going to cost you and your children dearly.

Send an e-mail, write a letter or make a phone call.

If you own a plane a little sky writing might be a nice touch.

Get active!

There’s nothing on TV anyway

I am your Energy minister and I want more wind

 

duncan31.jpg
or do I just have Gas

'Enronization' of energy

February 17, 2007

This article should wake up everyone regardless of which province or state you live in. The Enronization’ of energy must be stopped. This is not just about hydro power in BC, but all forms of electrical generation.

British Columbians in dark about ‘Enronization’ of energy

By Geoff Olson
Vancouver Courier
Friday, October 20, 2006

Once upon a time the rodeo capitalism of Enron could do no wrong-until 2000, when well-coifed clowns from the Houston-based energy trading company rode a bull market into the stands and scattered the rubes.

Enron may have collapsed in a heap of cooked books, but Squamish area rancher Tom Rankin insists that its business template for energy markets lingers, and that we’re being softened up for the “Enronization” of B.C.’s greatest public asset, our waterways. With the North American electricity industry being restructured to serve the U.S. market, he predicts things will end badly for British Columbian taxpayers, unless we put a stop to private purchase agreements for hydroelectric developments on hundreds of our

click for full story

Enronization