Archive for the ‘Municipality of kincardine’ Category

Wind Turbines Have a Negative Affect On Real Estate Value and Health

August 1, 2008

Premier McGuinty:

You are allowing wind turbines to be placed as close as 350 meters from homes.
This blatant disregard for people and their property must stop immediately.

No more excuses. Your office, and the office of the MOE, has all the information needed to fully  understand the negative impacts of placing wind turbines too close to people and their homes.

The guidelines for wind turbines in Ontario border on criminal. (knowingly putting health at risk and causing loss of equity)

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“. (If a person has to move to have good health – health risk
Who is going to purchase the property – loss of equity.
Dr. Gemmill
should have added stray voltage – a very real problem and health risk to both people and animals)italic added.

The reality is this.
Nowhere in the world has wind energy ever replaced, or caused the closure, of a fossil fuel plant.
Whether or not the coal plants in Ont. ever close, wind energy will not be the main contributing factor of any such closure.
Wind energy does not do a credible job of reducing emissions. If it did, the papers would be full of stories to that affect, they aren’t.
The main purpose of wind energy is to create carbon credits (e8).

Keeping the lights on and cutting emissions, is how wind energy is promoted in Ont. Neither is a credible statement.

At noon today the 472 MW’s of wind energy were producing – a not very
impressive 32 MW’s. I almost felt compelled to turn off my air conditioner. But then, it’s not my job to ensure we have power when needed, it’s yours, Mr. Premier. 8pm – 29 MWs

Premier McGuinty, if you think this post is harsh, it’s meant to be.

I visited with some more of your “wind farm” victims today.
They have been run out of their homes and had their lives turned upside down. WHY?
I also met with some of your “soon to be victims”.
How many more have to suffer Mr. McGuinty?

Poll Results- Is the Govt. being honest about wind energy (this blog)

  1. Yes – 148
  2. No – 632
  3. Don’t Know – 60

Mr. McGuinty, the citizens and industry in this province require and deserve, a cost effective, stable electrical system.

Build it, or call an election.

Premier McGuinty, if you believe your energy plan will stand up to public scrutiny, lets have a televised debate.
You bring your experts and I’ll bring mine.

I have a feeling the public will have a very different view of wind energy after a good healthy debate, or after reading the article below.

Premier McGuinty, give me a call and lets get on with the televised debate. It’s time the public understands the reality of wind energy in Ontario.

It’s also time they came to grips with the global warming scam. 50 years later – we’re still waiting.

Global Warming Video 1958

Yours

Ron Stephens

Independent
Huron-Bruce
519-396-1958

Note: I have invited the Ont. Govt., on several occasions, to check this blog for accuracy and to contact me if  they disagree with, or question, the information contained on this blog. Even though the  Ont. Govt. visits this site  often, “site tracker” and I send them information, I have never had the Govt. question or challenge any information concerning wind energy posted here.

Turbine noise nuisance highlighted

The judgement by the Lincolnshire Valuation Tribunal said it was apparent from the evidence submitted that the construction of the wind farm 930 metres away from the appeal dwelling had a significant detrimental effect on the appellants’ quiet enjoyment of their property.

“The tribunal found that the nuisance caused by the wind farm was real and not imagined and it would have an effect on the sale price of the appeal dwelling” said the judgement.

Now estate agents have acknowledged that the house, worth £170,000 before the wind farm was built in 2006, is now so severely blighted that no one is likely buy it.

Mr Lang said that the ruling is effectively an official admission that wind farms have a negative effect on house prices, and he said that the “victims” have had to rent a house five miles away where they go to sleep.

“It means many families in Scotland living in the shadow of giant turbines could see thousands wiped off the value of their homes as the Government pushes ahead with plans to build thousands more onshore wind turbines over the next decade to meet ambitious green targets.

“Jane Davis came up in September last year and gave a moving presentation in Auchtermuchty village hall on the subject of the intrusive, damaging and unpredictable noise from wind turbines.

“Since then she has been continuing in her own campaign and supporting others in the quest to have a safe buffer zone between wind turbines and dwellings.

“Scottish Planning Policy 6 sets out a distance of two kilometres from a village, but ignores the substantial number of dwellings that could be in that zone but not in a village.

“The effect on property prices is obvious and people should not be selectively economically disadvantaged in this way. There are about 30 properties within one kilometre of the EnergieKontor site near Ceres” said Mr Lang.

Gordon Berry

The Courier

full story at Turbine noise nuisance highlighted

Advertisements

Wind Turbines Being Erected All Over Rural Ontario – Destroying Lives and Property Values

June 19, 2008

This could be your home if you live in rural Ontario

The Enbridge wind farm Kincardine

115 turbines being erected right now

Today at 8 am the 472MWs of wind energy in Ontario were producing 8Mws

WOW!

Energy you can never count on

Enbridge wind farm Kincardine
click for full size

The Enron scam continues

Below is a video from the Suncor wind farm, Ripley Ontario. Since the video was made several families moved out of their homes because of the noise. Suncor has shut down some of the turbines so the people could move home.

Bigger setbacks are required.

A councilor who voted for the wind farm in Ripley, and has at least one turbine on the property, has been forced to leave the farm after suffering headaches, nosebleeds and sleep disturbances caused by the wind turbines. The closest turbine to the home is 700 meters.

Maybe that’s a form of poetic justice.

The Ripley council was warned about the negative affects that would occur if the turbines were within 1km of homes. Evidence suggests a setback of 1mile or 1.5km is required as a buffer between a home and a turbine.

Most setbacks in Ontario range from 300 – 450 meters.

How many families have to suffer, before the govt. wakes up to the reality that wind turbines are being placed too close to homes.

Or do they even care?

.

This also happened at the Port Burwell Wind farm, severe headaches and nosebleeds. The result, the family was bought out by the developer.

Wherever wind farms have been erected in Ontario, both people and animals are suffering from both noise and stray voltage.

I got a call from a farmer the other day, who says the feet on his bull are burnt because of stray voltage, he also lost many calves last spring.

YET

The MOE in Ontario continues to allow new wind farms while refusing to call for a health study or require realistic setbacks.

The bastardization of Ontario continues unabated

Thank Dalton McGuinty
a
UN Puppet

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

Wind turbine noise affects health

February 24, 2008

Editor
This is a damning report of the govt., the wind industry and the Provincial and Federal health departments.


research has suggested that those effects don’t cause long-term health impacts after people are no longer living near wind farms”.

Health Canada has never done a study of the health affects of wind turbines on the health of the people. I’ve asked, as have many others, both the Provincial and Federal Health Ministries why there hasn’t been a health study conducted. Now we know.

They already know industrial wind turbines are being placed too close to people and they know they have negative affects. Once you have been run off your property, the ill affects you experienced living next to a 400 ft. high wind turbine will disappear. Using their logic, there is no need for a health study.

d_entremont-point-pubnico.jpg
Daniel d’entremont and his family were forced from their home. The good news is their health is slowly returning to normal. They can’t live in their home any longer, but who cares about a home when you have your health.

Your government doesn’t give a damn, it’s that simple.

.

Wind farm raises health concerns; No long-term effect, says Kingston doctor

Posted By Jennifer Pritchett

Kingston’s public health department will lobby government for more research into the health effects of wind turbines.

Dr. Ian Gemmill, Kingston’s medical officer of health, says there hasn’t been enough monitoring done to determine whether they’re harmful.

Gemmill made the declaration at a board of health meeting this week in response to residents who live near the proposed site of a wind farm to be built on Wolfe Island.

The citizens had asked public health to assess the health risks associated with the turbines, but based on the information that is available, Gemmill said, there is nothing to indicate that wind turbines have any long-term effect on people’s health.

“We haven’t got a lot of evidence to go on right now,” said Gemmill. Gemmill 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.

As well, much of the research that is available, he said, doesn’t appear to come from reputable sources.

“Our conclusion is that while there may be some short-term concerns, this will not have a long-term health effect,” said Gemmill.

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.

“Seems to me what we’re really saying is that this person needs to move away and they’ll be OK,” she said.

Schmolka, who is also a city councillor, asked Gemmill if he was comfortable saying that there were definitively no long-term health effects from wind turbines.

“I’m saying it’s reversible,” he responded. “I know that people are bothered by this, but the question here is when do we become involved.”

thewhigJennifer Pritchett

Wind turbine noise affects health

According to the results of a new peer-reviewed study made available to us by the U.S. government’s National Institutes of Health, the connection between noise and coronary heart disease — particularly at night — is serious.

Wind energy ordinances must include a top limit for how much turbine noise can safely be added to our environment.

More than 15 million Americans currently have some form of coronary heart disease (CHD), which involves a narrowing of the small blood vessels that supply blood and oxygen to the heart. Risk factors for CHD include diabetes, high blood pressure, altered blood lipids, obesity, smoking, menopause, and inactivity.

To this list we can now add noise, thanks to a recent study and assessment of the evidence by the WHO Noise Environmental Burden on Disease working group.

“The new data indicate that noise pollution is causing more deaths from heart disease than was previously thought,” says working group member Deepak Prasher, a professor of audiology.

The working group compared households with abnormally high noise exposure with those with quieter homes. They also reviewed epidemiologic data on heart disease and hypertension, and then integrated these data.

“Many people become habituated to noise over time,” says Prasher. “The biological effects are imperceptible, so that even as you become accustomed to the noise, adverse physiological changes are nevertheless taking place, with potentially serious consequences to human health.”

Chronic high levels of stress hormones such as cortisol, adrenaline, and noradrenaline can lead to hypertension, stroke, heart failure, and immune problems. According to research, arousal associated with nighttime noise exposure increased blood and saliva concentrations of these hormones even during sleep.

“Taken together, recent epidemiologic data show us that noise is a major stressor that can influence health through the endocrine, immune, and cardiovascular systems,” says Prasher.

The broader implications of chronic noise exposure also need to be considered.

“Noise pollution contributes not only to cardiovascular disease, but also to hearing loss, sleep disruption, social handicaps, diminished productivity, impaired teaching and learning, absenteeism, increased drug use, and accidents,” says physician Louis Hagler, who coauthored a review on noise pollution in the March 2007 Southern Medical Journal.

Hagler added, “The public health repercussions of increasing noise pollution for future generations could be immense.”

M. Nathaniel Mead

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

Wind Watch News

Industrial Wind Farms Banned

December 4, 2007

From the Editor: I think everyone fighting against the plague that is wind farms should write a note thanking the CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREDERICKSBURG for doing it’s duty. That duty is look out for the best interest of it’s citizens. Everyone needs to make sure that their council reads this and “DEMAND” that they implement the Resolution set out by the Gillespie County Economic Development Commission.

Resolution of the Gillespie County Economic Development Commission

Industrial Wind Farms

The Gillespie County Economic Development Commission opposes the construction of industrial wind farms in Gillespie County and the surrounding Texas Hill Country area. This position is taken after a careful consideration of the issues associated with the economic and environmental impact of industrial wind farms.

The Hill Country is a jewel of Texas. It is highly touted and highly regarded for its landscapes and scenic beauty. It is a desirable area to both visit and live and property values and the robustness of the tourism economy reflect its attractiveness. Wind turbines are incompatible with the elements that make the Hill Country special. Their presence would cause irreversible harm. There is ample reason to believe that industrial wind farms would cause a general reduction in property values and would cause a significant reduction in tourism. Our county and city governments and our school districts are responsible and fiscally conservative. Accordingly, the loss of revenue from reduced tourist dollars and a tax based reduced by declining property values will result in a corresponding tax rate increase. Tax increases do not stimulate economic vitality.

The environmental impact of industrial wind farms is known. Wind turbines create a noise that is described as a penetrating low-frequency thudding vibration that travels even further than the measured audible noise. The spinning blades can create a flickering light on one side of a blade and a flickering shadow on the other side that can literally cause humans and animals to experience spatial disorientation. The spinning blades also kill and maim birds and bats. Each tower requires a cleared area of several acres at its base and the towers must be connected by roads capable of handling heavy equipment. The destruction of the landscape and wildlife habitat required for this is permanent. And, each tower is required to be lighted with a flashing red light at night. These adverse environmental impacts are a direct cause of the reduction in property values mentioned earlier.

The economic development commission generally applauds the search for alternative energy sources to satisfy our increasing demands. However, the commission is skeptical about the real potential for wind power’s contribution.

The U.S. Department of Energy reports that wind power has the potential to contribute 1.2% of our energy demand by the year 2030. To achieve this miniscule contribution to energy needs the federal government subsidizes the construction of wind farms through production tax credits and accelerated depreciation schedules. This essentially passes along a majority of the cost of construction of wind farms to taxpayers. The Gillespie County Economic Development Commission believes that the potential economic loss to the community is grossly out of proportion to the immeasurably small potential contribution industrial wind farms here could make to the energy solution.

The economic development commission respects the rights of individual property owners to make decision regarding their property without outside interference. However, the commission is concerned that property owners who exercise their property rights and sign lease options with industrial wind companies are actually relinquishing control of their property. While industrial wind farms may provide some economic benefit to the participating land owner, adjacent landowners will experience a decrease in property values and other adverse effects which effectively infringes upon their property rights. And there are additional complications. Transmission lines will be required to move the electricity from the wind farms to the electric grid. It is likely that eminent domain would be used to acquire rights-of-way for new transmission lines from non-participating, unwilling land owners.

To summarize, the Gillespie County Economic Development Commission believes that concern for the economic cost to the Gillespie County community as a whole far outweighs consideration of uncertain financial benefits to a few and a marginal at best contribution to future energy needs.

WHEREAS, there are now and there may be other companies in the future who are attempting to enter into lease agreements with landowners in Gillespie County for the purpose of erecting wind turbines (wind farms) on the scenic landscape of our community; and

WHEREAS, the construction of such wind farms will certainly be detrimental to the wildlife habitat of the area; and

WHEREAS, wind farms erected with the shadows of Enchanted Rock will forever scar a popular recreational asset of the area; and

WHEREAS, the construction of such wind farms will destroy the peaceful existence of the quality of life the residents of Gillespie County have come to enjoy over the years by generating noise from the turbines, creating “shadow, strobe or flicker” effects; and

WHEREAS, it is widely accepted by professional appraisers and members of the real estate community that land values where wind farms are built and the land of the adjoining property owners will be devalued by an estimated 25% to as much as 50% of its market value; and

WHEREAS, according to ERCOT wind study maps, the amount of wind generated in this area is in the bottom 20% of the available wind locations in the state of Texas; and

WHEREAS, the City has so agreed, and

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREDERICKSBURG:

The construction of wind turbines (wind farms) is not an industry that is welcomed or encouraged to come to the Gillespie County area.

Fredericksburg City Council

3 December 2007

Worldwide rush for wind power could result in massive debt

November 30, 2007

Posted November 30, 2007

As told in a recent ad, a Johnsburg farmer who will host wind turbines now has many regrets.

He regrets having been the “lure” to draw in other unsuspecting landowners. He regrets that he has allowed fields to be subdivided, road base to be spread on land once picked bare of rocks, costly tiling to be cut up. He regrets that he’s no longer the person who controls his own land and is now told where to go by security guards. He regrets the divide he has created between friends, between neighbors and between family members.

He regrets not having looked into all the ramifications first. That farmer is now locked in to a binding contract. But there are many landowners who have not yet suffered this fate.

Calumet County Citizens for Responsible Energy asks that landowners considering a contract first step back and study the issues. As with any financial transaction, don’t put a lot of trust in those who stand to gain financially.

Look for Web sites and information from those experiencing the effects of this worldwide “gold” rush for wind power. People across world are rebelling. They’re finding that they’ve lost control of their land and their lives. And they’re in danger of financial hardship if these companies dissolve.

Our irresponsible government representatives are forcing this “windfall” for wind investors on us. Their knee-jerk reaction to the global climate change alarms will cause billions of dollars to be wasted, lives to be ruined, and environments degraded for what is, in actuality, a very inefficient energy source.

With a declining tax base and state and U.S. legislators driving us further into massive debt, taxpayer subsidies for wind will be impossible to maintain.

And with the subsidies gone, what will you be left hosting?

Don Bangert,

Chilton

postcrescent.com

Bruce County to Get up to 3000 Turbines

July 28, 2007

From the Editor

Anything less than a complete moratorium on wind farms in Ontario is unacceptable. The corporations will smile at you while they take over rural Ontario. Heading full speed ahead back to “Feudal Times” where you are reduced to a Serf on the land you once owned and controlled.

Tell your Liberal MPP what you think.Serfdom is the socio-economic status of peasants under feudalism, and specifically relates to Manorialism. It was a condition of bondage or modified slavery seen primarily during the Middle Ages in Europe. Serfdom was the enforced labour of serfs on the fields of landowners, in return for protection and the right to work on their leased fields.

Serfdom involved work not only on fields, but various agriculture-related works, like forestry, transportation (both land and river-based), crafts and even in production. Manors formed the basic unit of society during this period, and both the lord and his serfs were bound legally, economically and socially. Serfs were labourers who were bound to the land; they formed the lowest social class of the feudal society. Serfs were also defined as people in whose labour landowners held property rights.

The Bruce County Federation of Agriculture is calling for measures to protect the county’s tourism industry, farming operations and municipalities from the rapidly developing wind energy industry.

“Recent studies in other countries have shown that large wind generating areas and tourism are not compatible. It would be a shame to lose the gains we have made in tourism by not having planning in place to make sure our tourism industry stays vibrant,” federation president Robert Emerson told Bruce County council’s agriculture, tourism and planning committee on Thursday.

The committee was looking at wind energy policy as part of the county’s five-year review of its official plan and because of concerns raised by residents and the industry over the lack of adequate regulations.

Committee members later approved 15 recommendation that chair Charlie Bagnato described as a beginning of more policies to regulate wind energy development.

The recommendations include one calling on developers to provide clearer information about shadow flicker and noise and a provision for a complaint protocol, so members of the public can make their concerns known to the developer and the county.

There was no proposal to change setbacks from built-up areas, which municipalities can set at anywhere from 400 to 700 metres. However, there were recommendations that the planning department conduct further research on the density of turbine development, cumulative impact of wind turbines in an area and the effect of cold weather on wind turbine operation.

Bagnato said more policies will be included once that information is received.

“The overall updates they made today will be helpful in the short term . . . but we’re suggesting now is the time to take a long-term view of the whole issue as it affects county tourism, county agriculture and we’re identifying some real important agricultural issues,” said Emerson.

Emerson held up the example of Grey Highlands, which has designated certain areas suitable for wind energy development and prohibits it in visually sensitive areas. It has incorporated those regulations into its official plan.

“This is fair to all concerned because then wind prospectors will know where they can develop their wind parks and farmers will know if their land is eligible for development,” Emerson said.

Saugeen Shores Mayor Mike Smith agreed with Emerson’s suggestion of looking into protecting natural and tourist attractions from wind energy development.

Chris LaForest, head of planning for Bruce County, noted the proposals by Grey Highlands still need approval by Grey County.

Emerson cautioned against rushing into new regulations to satisfy the demands of the wind energy industry. He noted the transmission capacity for new wind energy won’t be available until 2011 and the recent announcement of up to 3,000 megawatts of wind energy coming from Bruce County within the next 10 years would require between 1,500 and 3,000 wind turbines.

“Once these units are up and running . . . the citizens of Bruce County will be left to look at a wind park of industrial proportions for the rest of their lives,” Emerson warned.

Emerson also is concerned that wind turbines are not being fairly assessed. He worries that will result in municipalities collecting less in taxes.

Wind turbines are assessed by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation at $40,000 for each megawatt of electricity they are rated to produce. The standard 1.5 megawatt turbine worth $2.5 million dollars is assessed at $60,000. A farming operation of the same value is assessed at $500,000.

“To me these large wind turbines have been given a sweet heart deal by the province . . . there’s no fair comparison at all to agriculture. We see it having a detrimental affect on the whole county assessment,” Emerson said.

LaForest said he sees the updates to the county official plan passed by councillors on Thursday as a first step to setting policy for wind energy. Final approval will takes place at a meeting of County council on Aug. 2.

By Don Crosby

The Sun Times

28 July 2007

Tell your Liberal MPP what you think.

Wind Farms Fail Once Again in Ontario

July 24, 2007

From the Sygration website

Ontario Generation for 2007-07-24

All power production in Ont today. Once again wind fails. 400 MW capacity producing next to nothing.The graph starts at 1am. McGuinty is too stupid to be the leader of this province. I don’t have much faith in the other parties either. They have all become corporate puppets.

This is your province and your country please get involved. It is your children and grandchildren that will ask you why you were so apathetic.

click on the link to view the “Great Saviour” wind power stats for today. Be sure to click on pic to enlarge it.

sygration-ontario-generator-report

Ontario Wind Farms Produce Small Amount of Power

July 23, 2007

Ontario has about 400 MW of wind capacity. The Govt and the Media keep telling you how many homes the wind farms will power. Wind production figures are second from the bottom of page. The graph starts at 1am.They are not telling you the truth. It’s that simple. You can never depend on the wind to produce power when required. Therefore the question is, can it even be considered a power source?

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%.
dalton-mcguinty-promised-in-his-liberal-platform/

The Govt plans to trash rural Ont. hoping to get your vote before you, Joe Public, catch on. You lose every time a new wind farm is constructed and the people near the wind farm lose big time. Stand up for your neighbor and he will stand up for you.
Click the link to view the graph.
sygration-ontario-generator-report

The Importance of Large Hydro, Clean Coal and Nuclear Technologies within a Future Framework on Climate Change

July 23, 2007

From the editor
All the environmentalists better take a hard look at this. Looks like wind power is just to create carbon credits. Here comes big Hydro Dams, Big Coal Plants and Nuclear. We need to join forces and take back our electrical system.

T h e e 8 ‘ s r e c o mm e n d a t i o n s
Flexible Mechanisms under a future international framework on climate change must guide investments towards low
greenhouse gas (GHG) emitting options.
International institutions and national governments are increasingly looking to the private sector to invest in development
projects, especially in the case of climate-related initiatives.
To promote private sector involvement, the Flexible Mechanisms must not restrict the types and sizes of technologies and
projects that can be implemented to fight climate change and promote sustainable development.
The e8, an international group of leading electricity companies from the G8 countries, has undertaken small demonstration
projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) in the Kingdom of Bhutan and on the Galapagos Islands in Ecuador.
One of the most important lessons from these projects is that Flexible Mechanisms can play a major role in reducing GHG
emissions if large-scale electricity generation projects are permitted and indeed promoted.
The CDM process presents several barriers to project development. As a result, most of the projects registered to date are:
1. Projects targeting gases (HFC, N2O, CH4) with higher global warming potential than CO2 in order to generate a high
volume of CO2 credits and revenue so as to be financially attractive, and;

2. Small- or medium-size low cost energy sector projects.
Barriers to the deployment of large-scale electricity generation technologies should be eliminated in order to promote the
development of projects that will make a significant contribution to reducing greenhouse gases and increasing access to electricity.

Large-scale electricity generation technologies that should be further promoted by the CDM include:
Large hydro plants – As of December 2006, the CDM Executive Board (CDM EB) had approved only 17 hydroelectric
projects over 15 MW out of 456 CDM projects, of which only a few have installed capacity in excess of 100 MW. The
European Union Emission Trading System (EU ETS) has placed certain restrictions on the recognition of projects
exceeding 20 MW. Credits from hydroelectric projects exceeding 20 MW are only recognised if the projects comply, in
particular, with the recommendations of the World Commission on Dams. Such restrictions have limited the potential
of large hydroelectric projects to contribute to the efforts invested in reducing GHG worldwide. Large hydroelectric
generation projects can support sustainable development and achieve significant reductions in CO2 emissions, and
should thus be fully recognized by the Flexible Mechanisms.
Other large renewable projects – Introducing more renewables in the future energy mix when and where it is
appropriate, will help to ensure security of supply along with the reduction of CO2 emissions. This type of project
should continue to receive strong support through the future framework process.
Large efficient coal power plants – The relative low cost and abundance of coal will ensure that coal-fired electricity
generation will continue as a significant source of electricity generation. Opportunities for improving the efficiency
of coal-fired generation and reducing GHG emissions include implementation of supercritical and other clean coal
technologies, and carbon capture and storage. With the development of appropriate baselines, the reductions in
CO2 emissions associated with these new technologies can be verified and should be recognized by the Flexible
Mechanisms.
Nuclear power plants – Internationally, there is growing recognition that nuclear generation will have to be expanded
to mitigate CO2 emissions while reducing dependence on fossil fuels. Although the international climate change
agreements do not expressly prevent a project developer from proposing such a project to the CDM EB, no nuclear
projects have been presented to date. Nuclear generation must be recognized by the Flexible Mechanisms as a carbon free
source of electricity.

E8 website