Archive for the ‘OMB hearing Kincardine’ 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

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

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.

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