Archive for the ‘kincardine+ontario’ Category

Home near turbines won't sell

May 23, 2008

Editor
A property 900 meters from wind turbines In England had been deemed unsaleable. Most wind turbines in Ont. have a 450 meter setback. Kiss your property value goodbye.

Don’t forget to send your elected officials a card thanking them for their concern.

.

Home near turbines won’t sell – agent

A couple who have been forced out of their home by wind turbine noise have found out their house is unsaleable.

Jane and Julian Davis moved out of their Deeping St Nicholas home in Christmas 2006 after months of sleepless nights due to what they believe is noise and vibration from wind turbines, which are around 900m from their property.

They have long believed it has no value, and their fears have now been proved justified, after estate agents Munton and Russell refused to market the property at Grays Farm.

Mrs Davis said: “We have said for a long time that our house has no market value at the moment.

“But people said ‘put your money where your mouth is’ and prove it. While we knew that was the case, it is still a very painful thing to see written down.”

Russell Gregory wrote to Mr and Mrs Davis saying until the problems with wind turbines were resolved it was impossible to put a current market value on the property as no prospective buyer would want to live there and no mortgage lender would be prepared to lend on it.

He said: “I don’t think I have ever refused one before.

“Everything has a value, but where that value lies with something like this is a bit of an unknown quantity.

“We have a duty towards the buyer but if you can’t sleep there then it is uninhabitable.”

Mr and Mrs Davis own the house but they have another 23 years to run on the tenancy of the farmland.

And if it was not for Lincolnshire County Council relaxing their rules, Mr and Mrs Davis would not be allowed to moved out without losing the land and the bungalow in which Mr Davis’ parents still live.

The whole situation has seen their plans for the future, including extending the house, thrown into turmoil.

Mrs Davis added: “It was all our life’s dreams. We had plans to build on. Everything was ready to proceed but ultimately there was no point.”

By Tom Hughes

Spalding Today

22 May 2008

Advertisements

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.

Testimony before the New York State Legislature Energy Committee

January 11, 2007


Testimony before the New York State Legislature Energy Committee

March 7, 2006

Nina Pierpont, MD, PhD

MD, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1991
PhD, Population Biology, Princeton University, 1985
BA, Biology, Yale University, 1977
Fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics

http://www.ninapierpont.com

I am here to talk to you today as a physician-scientist about a clinical phenomenon called Wind Turbine Syndrome. This is relevant to today’s hearing because it critically affects implementation of the RPS (Renewable Portfolio Standard) in terms of the siting of industrial wind turbines. Current siting practices (which are solely industry-driven) disregard public health. The supervision of the legislature—of this committee—is needed to create siting standards to protect the citizenry, all the citizenry, including citizens who are rural, old, ill, impaired, and very young.

Federal agencies are trying to put the brakes on willy-nilly wind turbine construction, citing, for instance, wildlife issues. The GAO (Government Accountability Office) last fall told US Fish and Wildlife to get involved. The National Academy of Sciences in April 2005 initiated a 20-month study on environmental impacts whose final report is due in December this year. There also needs to be a focus on human health, and the state needs to step up to the plate in terms of regulation.

Story continues
http://www.savewesternny.org/docs/pierpont_testimony.html

Windmills aren't the answer

January 6, 2007

Well written article from the Post
Time to demand a stop to the wasteful use of your tax dollars

Colby Cosh, National Post

Published: Tuesday, November 21, 2006

It must be a harrowing time for those who once thought the cool breeze could save us all from the coming ecocide. The expectations of wind advocates have already had to be minimized as they realize there is nothing inherently virtuous about their pet piece of tech. Alas, like recycling fanatics, they are likely to end up praising wind power as a moral enterprise that “instills good habits” and signals “green consciousness,” even if the honest cost-benefit analysis goes against them in the long run.

click for full story

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/columnists/story.html?id=7235a029-e0cb-479d-aeb6-ef19c4fc32f5&p=1

colbycosh@gmail.com

© National Post 2006

The Future of Kincardine?

December 17, 2006

Don’t complain after the windmills are here.

Get active NOW!

Read the information on this site and if you still think wind farms are a good thing for the area, the environment or your pocket book, please read the information again.

The link below will help you understand. Think about 1000 plus of these machines along the Lake Huron shorline.

http://www.stopillwind.org/lowerlevel.php?content=Simulation

2006 International Workshop on Landscape Ecology and the problems with windfarms

December 5, 2006

te doen toekomen.
inmiddels verblijven wij
Jim Mollet
voorzitter Nationaal Kritisch Platform Windenergie
http://www.nkpw.nl <
http://www.nkpw.nl/>
Press Message



The NKPW (Nationaal Kritisch Platfom Windenergie) brings to your attention the outcome of the

2006 International Workshop on Landscape Ecology and the problems with wind farms

as held last week in Seoul, Republic of Korea.

The parties signing the Seoul Green Manifesto, the NKPW and other European participants, urge the EU to take the appropriate measures as requested in the Manifesto to protect our Cultural Heritage from the wind turbines on land locations.

We share concerns about possible global warming and deficiencies in fossil fuels, and from that perspective, we want to emphasize that wind turbines should not be considered as a solution or part of any package tackling the problems. As an old technology, it offers not only no solution for those problems but it drains so many public funds that a real solution which should be based on innovation and research is blocked.

In the meantime the European participants have agreed to organize an European summit in Hamburg, forthcoming January, to bundle their resources. They will invite all countries of the EU to join them, with the purpose to oppose the internationally well organized wind turbine lobby.

We take this opportunity to disclose the key statements made on the press conference held on Jeju Island last week:

Erwin Thorius, Chairman SDE Denmark:

In the last three years no single on-shore wind turbine have been build in Denmark

Stein Malkenes, Chairman Naeringslivets Kystakson,Norway:

The reality is that Jeju Island Governement has to choose, because it is not possible to have both growing tourism and wind turbines; wind turbines have a proven negative impact on tourism

Ferdinand Fürst zu Hohenlohe-Bartenstein, Chairman BLS, Germany

Soon we “celebrate ” the 20.000th wind plant, without replacing even one single small plant of conventional energy

Jim Mollet, Chairman NKPW, the Netherlands

The Republic of Korea impresses all participants with what has been reached. The Koreans refused to become followers of an old technology (wind turbines), and instead are purposed to become leaders in renewable energy by doing research and finding real solutions the world needs.

Information about this press message could be obtained from Jim Mollet, chairman of NKPW telephone number 0031 72 5023280 ja.mollet@planet.nl


Why are we building wind farms in Ontario.

The Ontario Liberals should scrap their wind energy policy NOW! Littering Ontario with wind turbines will not benefit the public. Lives have already been ruined by your wind energy policy.Property values have been affected. Countless hours of precious time and resources have been spent fighting your failed wind policy. Yet you continue to shove wind turbines down our throats .

Give it up Mr. Duncan.

Wind is not the answer, not even in a small way.

Kirby Mountain: French Academy of Medicine warns of wind turbine noise

November 26, 2006

Kirby Mountain: French Academy of Medicine warns of wind turbine noise

Setback
Based on these health effects and hazards, turbines should not be placed within 1700 feet of any road or dwelling. Those living within ½ mile (2640 ft) should be apprised that they are likely to experience very bothersome levels of noise and flicker, which continue (though to a lesser degree) to a mile or more from the turbines. At 2 miles, noise is sometimes heard, but few people are bothered. In Lincoln Township, WI, after two years with the turbines, 73% of people said they would not consider buying or building a house within a mile of the turbines, and 23% wished to be at least 2 miles away (212 people sampled).
In conclusion, based on these data, wind turbines should not be built within 1.5 miles of people’s homes. Let it be understood, however, that there will still be health and life quality problems caused by wind turbines beyond this radius. People living 1.5 to 3 miles from a proposed turbine site should be notified of potential health and life quality effects, and for this they should be appropriately compensated.

http://www.ninapierpont.com/?s=wind

Windfarm Industry equals subsidised Environmental Destruction

November 14, 2006

Windfarm Industry equals subsidised Environmental Destruction

Wind power supporters don’t understand problems

November 14, 2006

 Why is it that supporters of commercial wind power routinely ignore the ever-growing mountain of data demonstrating this technology’s ineffectiveness?

National Wind Watch | Wind power supporters don’t understand problems