Archive for the ‘Energy Minister Dwight Duncan’ Category

Pugwash wind project damaging says Elizabeth May Leader of the Green Party

July 26, 2007

From the Editor

I thank Elizabeth May for getting involved. Yes 500 meters is too close to homes. Here in Bruce County Ontario the setback is a mere 450 meters. The people here asked for a 1km setback at an OMB hearing, but in the end, after a 7 week hearing the OMB agreed with both the MOE and Enbridge that 450 meters is a safe distance. It is not.

Elizabeth May is all for wind power but not when it’s forced upon those residents living near giant windfarms such as the one proposed for the Gulf Shore.

The leader of Canada’s Green Party feels wind energy has great potential but is concerned when a company like Atlantic Wind Power chooses the wrong site because it runs the risk of discrediting renewable energy.

“We don’t want anything that stands in the way of the effective uptake of wind energy, but when you choose the wrong place and are not sensitive to local concerns it’s a real mistake,” May said. “Shorelines, where people have a lot of cottages, are not a good place. I haven’t gone and measured it myself, but the Pugwash beach is very much up against the 500-metre limit and that’s an unreasonably close spot.”

While the Green Party supports wind energy as a renewable energy source, May said the party also stands for grassroots decision-making.

Atlantic Wind Power Corporation plans to erect between 20 and 27 110-metre high wind turbines on the Gulf Shore near Pugwash. Project opponents want a two-kilometre separation between their properties and the proposed project, but the Municipality of Cumberland recently passed a bylaw setting the distance at the greater of 500 metres or three times the height of the turbine.

May believes the health concerns being raised by Gulf Shore residents are more than fear-mongering.

“Anyone who objects to wind farms because they’re ugly I’m not really impressed with, but as a health issue if you’re going to be that close it’s going to affect the quality of your life,” she said.

By Darrell Cole

Amherst Daily News

25 July 2007

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.

"Globalization, Electrical Energy and Multilevel Governance"

July 23, 2007

 From the editor

Enron may be gone but their policies live on.  

Presentation to the Globalization, Multilevel Goverance
and Democracy Conference, Institute of
Intergovernmental Relations, Kingston, Ontario, May 3,
2002.
Alexander Netherton
Simon Fraser University

Paradigm Shift, Changes in Policy Communities and Networks
PParadigm shift: from Keynesian to neoliberal P Emergence of global and regional policy communities and regulatory regimes
P New internationalization /continentalization of energy politics – ususal question centres on policy convergence
P Paradigm shift => changes in policy community and network (Perl and Coleman)
P Is there a shift in the nature of governance?
P Internationalization of the US regulatory model and energy regime to Canada
P Is this “multilevel governance”?
Introduction : Argument in Brief
Multilevel Governance in an Intergovernmental Region?
PQualified Yes
P Literature on “multilevel governance” searches
for supranational institutions
P North America dominated by intergovernmental
form of market integration
P US domestic regime share’s paradigmatic assumptions with, but is clearly dominant over international regime, CDN domestic regimes
PUS (dominant state’s) domestic policy regime
emerged as pivot in regional (Canada-US)
reorganization/restructuring
P Some predictable and other surprising changes to
process of governance
P A BC view of North American integration?
Introduction : Organization
Plan of Presentation
PTheoretical framework: Paradigm change =>
change in policy process
P Global origins of North American sectoral multilevel governance (SMG)
PRegional origins of SMG
P Centrality of SMG in paradigm shift
P Characteristics –policy community/network
P Present Summary / Conclusions /suggest
questions/ strategy for research
Globalization : Paradigm Change
New Policy Regimes (formal/informal rules) / Epistemic
Communities / Issue Networks
PInternational Energy Agency IEA /OECD energy
supply and investment regimes
P World Bank : privatization, anti-corruption and
development world capital market in
infrastructure for development & reconstruction
P World Trade Organization (WTO) :GATT and
GATS energy as commodity (Triad supply) as
service (transnationals)
P Kyoto Protocol / market and regulatory regimes
to reduce global warming
PUN World Commission on Dams (energy and
social contract)
P New technologies (gas turbine, point of use
technologies, chip)
Globalization : Policy Regime Changes
Complete Restructuring of Energy Sector
PEmerging global energy (and infrastructure)
transnationals that can work within and between
global regions (Hydro Quebec,Enron, others)
P Postwar utility: vertically integrated monopoly
(VIM) : energy production, transmission and
distribution in one firm P Neoliberal idea: divide VIM into different functionally specialized firms
P New functionally specialized firms form an energy sector that is integrated by a market
P All firms/markets within energy sector would need arms length regulation
P New organization provides opportunity structures for transnational investment

Globalization Electrical Energy

OMB Hearing – Decision Issued July 16th

July 19, 2007

From the Editor

I have just finished reading the OMB judgment for the Enbridge wind farm in Kincardine. My take on the Judgment goes like this. One man who knows nothing about the wind industry is charged with listening to testimony from both sides and making a judgment. Even though people testified about the problems they are experiencing from the wind farms near their homes, their testimony was dismissed because it is a different wind farm. Two separate engineering reports by the wind industry state that any turbine within 1000 meters will have a negative affect, I can find no reference to these reports in the decision. Makes no sense. Elizabeth May of the Green party who is a big promoter of green energy sides with Anne Murray when it comes to the siting of wind farms near homes. Not the OMB. The question that needs to be answered is, does the the OMB have any power to force changes or is it just a rubber stamp. The chair states that the Enbridge wind farm conforms to the MOE and Bruce County guidelines. It does not however conform to the guidelines set out by the WHO.

Tell your Liberal MPP what you think.

Here is another story of a family run out of their homes

On July 20, 2007 Ruth & I decided to drive from the Gulf Shore to Elmira, which is on the northeastern tip of PEI, to visit with Dwayne Bailey and his father, Kevin, and view the new local wind farm. Both abandoned their lifelong homes because they could not tolerate the noise from this facility.

The OMB gives no weight to these events, and the govt just denies there is a problem.

When I get some time I will post the entire decision and you can decide if the judgment was correct and in the best interest of the public.

A very bad day for the people of Ontario. Everybody must continue too fight this McGuinty Govt. and their ridiculous energy policy. The corporations didn’t care about polluting the world and they don’t give a damn about saving the world. They care about the money and that’s all they care about.

To all those fighting wind farms and any other stupid govt. policy around the world. Keep fighting. You are heroes of the common man

Tell your Liberal MPP what you think.

Europe drying up for wind energy developers

July 12, 2007

‘Wind energy in the U.S. “is like Europe was years ago,” says Xavier Viteri, head of Iberdrola’s renewable-energy business. “There’s a lot of room for development there ….”‘ (Wall Street Journal, July 9, 2007, page A1)

That raises the question, Why isn’t Europe like Europe was? Clearly, the momentum has slowed. Even “showcase” Denmark hasn’t added new wind capacity since 2004. Doubts have arisen about the utility of wind energy on the grid. Adverse impacts (to wildlife, landscape, and human health) can no longer be denied. Instead of repeating Europe’s mistakes, the U.S. and Canada ought to consider the limits of wind energy that European countries have already discovered.

There’s a good reason Iberdrola and other European wind developers are moving their efforts to North America. Europe doesn’t want them any more. Let’s learn from that experience instead of repeating the same boondoggle.
From Kirby Mountain

Green Party of Canada Opposes Placing Industrial Wind Farms too Close to Homes

July 9, 2007

The following article is the first of a new series dedicated to local issues. We’ll try to present topics of interest to everyone and we invite readers to share their experience and knowledge on local challenges. This article was written by Bernard Viau, editor of Green Canada Vert and secretary of the electoral district association (EDA) in the Quebec riding of Montmagny L’Islet Kamouraska Rivière-du-Loup, located in the lower Saint-Lawrence river area.

Wind farm projects are being announced every month in Quebec and are growing like mushrooms, but the air is turbulent in the wind industry. The promoters tell us that wind farms will reduce greenhouse gas emissions (but reducing our consumption of meat will do more to reduce the GHG emissions).

Don’t be fooled, the money they are investing in wind energy has nothing to do with the environment. Promoters build wind farms because there is a lot of money to make. Firstly, it’s a tax shelter and a very efficient one. They also receive production bonuses from the government and special credits for reducing air pollution.

Wind farms may be built on private land but they affect the landscape, which is common property, so to speak. Opposition to wind farms has focussed mainly on this spoiling of the landscape. Most of the time, we judge things according to their potential return on investment and so, it is only normal that promoters and shareholders are at loss when one speaks of the “value” of a landscape. In Europe, citizens are complaining that miles of landscape have been destroyed by wind farms; many are even complaining about health hazards associated with them. In Europe, land values have fallen around wind farms, and tourism also. Let’s face it, a wind farm is like a forest of huge towers with intermittent headlights on top of them for airplanes; nobody can miss them!

Also construction needs a lot of cement; a sea of cement would give a better picture. Thousands of trucks, very heavy, very broad and very long, damage the roads, on top of polluting with diesel fumes, noise, vibrations, dust and traffic. House foundations will be affected, and the following spring roads will break up.

In 30 years, if the promoters have not declared bankruptcy to avoid paying for dismantling of wind towers, the foundations will be left to the grandchildren of the original owners. It would be better to force promoters to put money in trust to cover end-of-life dismantling; a form of asset fund for future generations.

If promoters and shareholders had their way, public enquiries would not be necessary. Industrial wind farms are not nice and green like the promoters want us to believe.

Complete Story

Anne Murray lends voice to opponents of N.S. wind farm

July 4, 2007

By DARRELL COLE The Canadian Press | 5:41 PM

GULF SHORE — Nova Scotia’s songbird wishes a proposed wind farm in Gulf Shore would just fly away.

Singer Anne Murray, who has a summer home in the area, is joining other residents in opposing the construction by Atlantic Wind Power Corp. of 20 to 27 100-metre-high wind turbines in the province’s northwest corner.

“I just think it’s too close. It’s in all our backyards,” said Murray, who grew up in nearby Springhill. “I think wind power is a good thing, and I am all for them when they’re in the right place. I don’t believe these ones are in the right place.”

The project is presently undergoing an environmental assessment. Depending on how that goes, construction could begin in 2009.

Area residents have been fighting the project since it was first proposed and urged Cumberland County to set the distance between the turbines and their properties at a minimum of two kilometres. Instead, the municipality passed a bylaw setting the distance at the greater of three times the height of the turbine, or 500 metres.

Company president Charles Demond has said a two-kilometre setback would kill the project.

Murray feels the concerns being raised by the Gulf Shore Association and area residents aren’t being taken seriously. She believes there are too many unanswered questions surrounding the placement of turbines close to homes, including the effects of noise, vibration and shadow flicker.

“Some people think this is just a bunch of hysterical people opposed to change, but nothing could be farther from the truth,” she said. “These people are in favour of wind power, but the bylaw passed by the county doesn’t set the distance far enough between their homes and these turbines.

“I’m all for progress and I’m all for change, but not this close.”

Murray said she’s also not opposed to using her celebrity to help project opponents because she feels this wind farm will have a “catastrophic” impact on Pugwash and the Gulf Shore area.

The Amherst News

Dalton McGuinty and his Wind Farm Dream

May 13, 2007

Dalton McGuinty is a DISASTER

By not putting the scrubbers on the coal plants he has put the people of Ont. at risk. He said he would shut down the coal plants in 2007. I have yet to find a report saying that was possible. Options for coal plants

He said he got bad advice.

Now he wants to cover Ontario with wind farms.

More bad advice Dalton?

Leamington has joined the Town of Essex in approving a one-year ban on new wind and solar power projects until a county planning study is done to help put some controls in place.

Dalton forgot to put controls in place.

Probably got bad advice Again

When are you going to tell the people about the thousands of megawatts of gas plants in the works to back up your wind dream.

When are you going to tell the people about the massive increases they can expect in their electric bills.

You are either a FOOL or a LIAR. Either way you are not fit to be premier of this province.

I have sent my blog to every Liberal MPP in Ontario asking that they look it over and to get back to me if they find anything they question or disagree with. To date I have had no replies. Therefore it can be concluded that the information on my blog is factual and is accepted as factual by the Liberal Party of Ont.

Tell your Liberal MPP what you think.

If you have any questions please contact me.

Please read the excerpts from

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

Monday 10 April 2006

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North)

Before I wrap up here, I wanted to just spend a few moments on the blackout in 2003 and where we’re going, as a province, as a result of that. I’ll tell you, we have some very interesting data that’s coming towards us on our hydro supply and where we’re going with hydro in the province of Ontario.

It seems so amazing that we had the blackout just prior to the election. One of the election promises was that the new government, the Liberal Party, would close all coal-fired generation by the year 2007, which is now nine months away — the beginning of 2007.

I recall Dalton McGuinty on Steve Paikin’s show one night. Mr. Paikin was interviewing Mr. McGuinty, and he said, “Mr. McGuinty, would you close the coal-fired generation early in 2007 or later in the year?” He looked like a deer in the headlights when he answered the question. He said, “I’d close the coal-fired generation late in 2007.” That means sometime in November or December, 2007. That’s 6,416 megawatts that we’ll have to close down. As of today in the province of Ontario, the only coal-fired generation that has been closed down is Lakeview, and that’s the one that we had planned on closing down four years ago; Elizabeth Witmer made the announcement and was at the ceremony that actually closed it. The Progressive Conservative Party’s plan for coal-fired generation was that we would close the facilities down by 2015. That is still, today, the most realistic figure we can come up with, because we have to find a way to find 6,416 megawatts in the province of Ontario.

I was really interested today: It’s amazing that the minister’s comments on wind power came up the same day we’re debating Bill 56, we’re talking about blackouts and all that sort of thing. One of the things that really was amazing is that the government is counting on the total capacity of the wind power generation as fact. This all ties in to our need for power, so we don’t have another blackout, another natural disaster. To date: Melancthon Grey wind project, which is 67.5; the Kingsbridge wind project, 39.6 megawatts; Erie Shore’s wind farm, 99 megawatts; the Prince wind farm, 99 megawatts; and the Blue Highlands wind farm, 49.5. That’s a total of 354.6 megawatts. The minister keeps saying that’s how many megawatts she has coming on-stream.

1730

The reality is that in this book put out by the Independent Electricity System Operator — which I think is a government body, part of the old Ontario Hydro — it says, under an asterisk at the bottom, “For capacity planning purposes, wind generation has a dependable capacity contribution of 10% of the listed figures.” So of the 354.6 megawatts that Minister Cansfield talked about today, according to our own Independent Electricity System Operator, we really only have 35 megawatts, if you consider 10%.

The reason is that we can never shut down the other systems. We can’t shut down a nuclear reactor and use all 354 megawatts. We can’t shut down a power dam. We can’t shut down a natural-gas-fired system, because it takes too long to fire them up. Even if we bring all these wind turbines on stream, we still have to leave all the other ones in place. So not only do we have to replace 6,460 megawatts of coal-fired — we should even maintain that, or replace it with something other than wind, because the wind turbines certainly don’t have the ability to work all the time. If you have a hot summer day — 30 or 35 degrees Celsius outside — and there’s no wind, there’s no wind power. There’s no turbine going to operate that will feed our air conditioning systems across the province of Ontario.

The same thing applies to the ones that she has planned. The Wolfe Island wind project, the Leader wind project A, the Leader wind project B, Prince II wind power, Kingsbridge II, Ripley wind power project, the Kruger energy port and the Melancthon II wind project total 955 megawatts. The reality is that, under the Independent Electricity System Operator, they will only have a total capacity, probably, of around 130.9 megawatts, if you take into account the fact that this booklet says they’re only at 10% of capacity.

My concern is that we’re creating this illusion out there that we’re doing all these wonderful things in power. I’m very, very concerned that if they do close those coal-fired generators down in 2007, like they promised they would to the citizens of the province of Ontario, we won’t have nearly enough power to operate in the province and we will be in a serious blackout right here in Ontario.

Up our way, we’ve got a couple of projects, one by a company named Ventus Energy. They’re one of the companies that want to put wind power into Simcoe county; apparently there are a couple of proposals there. I understand now that a guy by the name of David Peterson is one of the members of the board of directors. I hope that’s not the David Peterson that was the Premier here. In my opinion, his ties to the Liberal Party would make this very, very uncomfortable if we go towards awarding contracts to this company. I believe that the contracts will be awarded for a 20-year period at 8.5 cents or nine cents a kilowatt-hour. My understanding, talking to people who have a lot more knowledge about wind turbines than I do myself, is that they stand to make a fortune out of this over the next 20 years, because the first 10 years will pay off the cost of the turbines.

If there’s anything we can do around electricity, because it has such an impact on emergency planning in the province of Ontario, if there’s anything we can do whatsoever, it’s to make sure we tell the people in the province, our citizens, that wind power may be wonderful — everybody wants to have their energy come from green, if it possibly can — but let’s not put them under an illusion that there’s something seriously wrong here, and we’re spending millions and millions of dollars for only 10% of the capacity they actually perform at. That scares me, particularly if someone is foolish enough to actually close down that coal-fired generation in 2007, as Dalton McGuinty promised in his Liberal platform. That is a scary thought.

I understand that they’re going to put one on hold — I think it’s Atikokan, or maybe Nanticoke — but the reality is, if we close the other three, we’re still in a serious problem. If we thought we had a blackout and emergency planning was required in the summer of 2003, God only knows what we’ll need if we shut that coal-fired generation down without a proper, adequate supply of electricity for the future.

1740

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): It’s my pleasure to add some comments on the debate this afternoon on Bill 56, An Act to amend the Emergency Management Act, the Employment Standards Act, 2000 and the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997.

We just had our leadoff speech from the hard-working member from Simcoe North, who spoke for an hour on this bill. Toward the end of his speech, one of the points he brought up was the emergency that is being created in this province by this government, by its irresponsible plan to shut down coal-fired generation in the province before it has an adequate supply of electricity to replace that coal-fired generation. I can tell you that there’s an emergency being created in northern Ontario. Every week there’s another paper mill, another forestry company announcing layoffs or slowdowns.

When they talk about some of the recent announcements to do with electricity and solar power at a cost of 42 cents a kilowatt hour or wind power at a cost of 12 cents a kilowatt hour, I can tell you that will not sustain the economy of the province.

Originally, their plan was to shut down coal-fired generation in 2007; that was the first announcement. That has now been backed up to 2009, and I hear rumours of maybe 2011. Of course, that’s well beyond the next election, so this will be another broken promise, thank goodness, that this government will not be able to keep.

OMB Hearing Starts in Kincardine Ontario(updated July 19th)

April 30, 2007

“The People” vs the Municipality of Kincardine, the Ontario Government and Enbridge.

A small group of landowners are in for the fight of their lives. It has been said that this hearing will set the stage for the future of wind farm development in Ontario.

Today was the first day of the hearing and most of the day was spent figuring out process and time lines. Over the next seven or eight weeks testimony will be heard from people in Ontario and Nova Scotia who have had their lives ruined by the wind turbines near their homes. Setbacks will be questioned as well as noise levels. This small group of people is fighting not just for themselves, but for everyone who is threatened by a wind farm in their neighborhood.

Home of Daniel d’Etremont
click for larger view

The d’Etremont family of Nova Scotia was driven from their home by the wind turbines. A special thanks to Daniel for making the trip to the OMB hearing in Kincardine Ont. to share his story, in the hope that what happened to his family won’t be repeated.

Update 1 May 15th

Update 2 May 15th

Update 3 May 15th

Update 4 May 29th

Update 5 May 29th

OMB Decision Filed July 16th 2007-A very bad day for the people of Ontario. Everybody must continue too fight this McGuntiy Govt. and their ridiculous energy policy.

 

Kingsbridge l wind farm

Kingsbridge l wind farm just north of Goderich Ontario

If you followed the wind farm saga you will know that the story is the same everywhere in the world. Agents show up at the door of farmers or rural landowners offering money for their help to create clean renewable energy for the future of the county and their children. Before they know it they have signed a lease for up to twenty years.

Next get the local politicians involved and tell them how a wind farm in their area will create lots of high paying jobs and be a great source of tax dollars.

The last to find out are the people who will be affected by the wind farm. Both the politicians and the wind company assure the people that there will be no problems.

A little research and people are alerted to all kinds of negative effects like noise, flicker, sleep disturbance and property devaluation.

They go to council with their research in hand but it is ignored. They are again assured there will be no problems and that having a wind farm will create jobs, tax dollars and help solve the global warming problem. At this point peoples lives are put on hold while they continue to try and convince their council to look at the well documented problems that can and do occur. Most times they leave shaking their heads and wondering why their council can’t see the obvious.

It’s about the money and they are more than prepared to sacrifice you and your property to get it

The real truth about wind farms and wind energy is quite simple

. Take most anything they tell you and flip it 180 degrees and you have the truth

A wind farm in your area will creates lots of high paying jobs. Flip that statement 180 degrees and you have the truth.

Wind turbines are quiet. Flip that statement 180 degrees and you have the truth.

You get the idea.

So for the next seven or eight weeks they are going to fight this fight and they intend to win.

To all those fighting the scourge of wind farms around the globe, Don’t Ever Give Up.Your support is appreciated

Ron Stephens

Blowing Our Tax Dollars

Tories' green plan a fraud: Gore

April 28, 2007

Apr 28, 2007 04:39 PM
Canadian Press

The Conservatives’ new environmental platform is a “complete and total fraud” that is “designed to mislead the Canadian people,” former U.S. vice-president Al Gore said today.

The noted environmentalist was presenting his documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” in Toronto at a consumer environmental show, with Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty and environmentalist David Suzuki in attendance.

Gore praised Suzuki for confronting Environment Minister John Baird on Friday, saying he saw the two exchange words on TV.

When Baird told Suzuki the Conservatives were going further than any other government in Canadian history, Suzuki said it wasn’t enough.
Gore is the fraud along with his sidekick Suzuki

I’ve never been a big cheerleader for the Conservatives but the Liberals are so far off base it is sickening, Gore is making a fortune from carbon trades, Maurice Strong is on the board of directors for the Suzuki foundation. The Ont. Liberals are fools taken in by big business trying to win the vote by trying to look green. The coal plants in Ont. are still spewing health  harming emissions. CO2 is not one of them. We are living  with chicken little just like Iraq. Kill the spin and demand the truth.

Go to original story