Archive for the ‘Ontario Hydro’ Category

The Green Energy Act – Tom Adams

July 5, 2009

Tom Adams talks about new powers in the Green Energy Act that allows the govt. to impose unlimited energy taxes.  Fascism has arrived in Ontario!

Advertisements

Al Gore Exposed by Congress Global Warming

May 4, 2009

Gore is and always has been a con man.  Google Al Gore and Enron or Al Gore and Maurice Strong.  The Liberal Party of Ontario is involved in the scam. Either that or McGuinty and his party  are completely stupid.

Either way, they must change direction or be brought to justice.

Watch Gore squirm in this C-Span video.

Ontario Hydro – The Future

April 28, 2009

This video spoof of BC Hydro should be looked at as a warning for people living in Ontario.

The “Green Cult” has too much say in the operation of our electrical generation system.

This must STOP!

Toronto Star – Wind Farms

January 27, 2009
Toronto Star – Propagandist for the Govt.?
Update: Response I received from the Toronto Star editorial board when I asked questions about one of their editorials. (found below)
If you live in rural Ontario you may want to consider canceling the Toronto Star. They’ll take your money but they won’t recognize you.

Response to my letter to the editorial board of the Toronto Star. If you live in the Rural Ontario  you count for nothing.

Dear Mr. Stephens:
The “community” I am referring to is the Star’s community of readers.
Given that the Star is considered “the voice of the GTA” this would be
the community of readers in Toronto and the Greater Toronto area.
Certainly, many people in many communities would disagree with the views
put forward in this editorial opinion (as will any editorial). That is
their prerogative, as it is yours.
I will not be taking any further action on this editorial; nor will I be
providing you will “verification’ of the research done by the Star’s
editorial board as that is certainly not our practise.
I think the arguments put forward in the editorial speak for themselves
and it is beyond the scope of my role to question the conclusions drawn
in Star editorials.
As I told you, an editorial is an opinion based on the editorial board’s
interpretation of the facts at hand. While you may hold another opinion
I see no value in our debating these facts. I am not going to change
your mind about this issue and the Star’s editorial board is not likely
to reverse its position on this issue at this point in time.
Regards,
Kathy English

Kathy

I would like you to verify the research done and the content of the
research.

“This editorial view was arrived at after much research, thought and
debate by members of the Star’s editorial board, a group of six
journalists, under the direction of Editorial Page Editor Ian Urquhart,
who are charged with the responsibility of determining and expressing
the Star’s position on important matters affecting our community.
Because editorials represent the institutional voice of the newspaper,
they are never signed by the individuals who write them”.

I would also like someone to explain who’s community the article is
referring to.
I know many people, in many communities who would strongly disagree with
the position of the editorial board of the Toronto Star, including the
senior policy adviser for the Ministry of Energy and the ex-CEO of the
OPA.

I have invited the Provincial govt. to go through the information on my
site and point out any inaccuracies. To date, even though they are on my
site daily, they have never questioned or requested any changes.
I therefore request that your editorial staff go through my site as
well.

I want to know how they came to their conclusions.

The editorial board must be able to justify their position or it could
be considered propaganda.

Regards

Ron Stephens

Editor: The first casualty of war is TRUTH.
There is a war being waged against the rights of the citizens of Ontario by the environmental movement and the Toronto Star has become a propagandist for the movement.

1. a person involved in producing or spreading propaganda.
2. a member or agent of a propaganda.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)Cite This Source
I added the name of the writer to this article. Maybe the writer of this piece of propaganda didn’t want her name to be associated with such a piece of trash. I thought Tyler Hamilton (energy writer) could spew some garbage, but Ms. Gillespie has given Mr. Hamilton a new low to strive for.

SAVE THE PLANET-CUT LESS TREES-

CANCEL YOUR SUBSCRIPTION TODAY!


EDITORIAL TheStar.com | Opinion | Windmills vs. NIMBYism
Oct 20, 2008 04:30 AM – By Kerry Gillespie

After three years of effort, a $300 million wind farm that would have brought green power to Ontario has been cancelled. This is the latest casualty of a provincial planning process that just isn’t up to the task of ensuring that the best interests of all Ontarians prevail.

I guess the people forced from their homes and those living in misery because of wind turbines, don’t count in Ms. Gillespie’s Ontario.(added)


The province wants the clean energy that comes from projects like wind turbines. So much so that Energy Minister George Smitherman sent a $60 billion plan on how to meet the province’s electricity needs for the next two decades back to the drawing board to get more renewable energy and conservation into the mix.

According to the senior policy adviser I talked to – 10 billion spent on a real electrical system, would have provided Ontario with cost effective, clean, affordable electricity. He says we are dealing with politics. Try running your home or business on politics. At least 50 billion will be unnecessarily wasted ,causing your electric bill to skyrocket, and driving business from the province.(added)

Yet time and time again wind farms and other environmentally worthy projects run into the wall that is Ontario’s outdated, drawn-out planning process. Some manage to make it through. The wind farm planned for a township near Goderich didn’t.

The delays in getting through the process are difficult enough – often amounting to millions of wasted dollars – but the real problem comes when someone, and there’s always someone, wants to oppose the project. The NIMBYists are able to use the myriad planning steps – rezoning, official plan amendment, council approval, provincial environmental assessment and the spectre of an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board – as weapons in their fight.

As a spokesperson for the doomed Goderich wind farm said: “We’re a very conservative province, so it’s difficult to put anything anywhere.”

It’s not just wind farms the NIMBYists fight. They also oppose traditional generating stations. That forces Ontario to buy expensive – and often dirty – power from elsewhere.

And they fight urban “intensification” in the form of highrise buildings, which help curb sprawl.

In some European jurisdictions, municipalities are given the right to say where wind turbines can’t go. But they also have to say where they can go. In Ontario, it’s simply too easy to say no and hope to delay the project long enough that the developers give up and decide to give it a try in someone else’s backyard.

According to a  councilor involved in the Kingsbridge ll wind farm, he was told that any setback over 450 meters would not be tolerated. He was told to pass the setback or the township would be taken to the OMB and that the township would lose, costing the township $100,000. This, dispite the fact Kingsbridge l at 450 meters had already caused major problems for people living in the shadows of the turbines.(added)

The energy minister is right to call for more renewable energy. Now the provincial government must make sure its planning processes support that goal, even if it means someone may have to gaze upon a windmill from the living room window.

Because reality and truth no longer matter to the Toronto Star, I ask that you show your disapproval by boycotting the paper. Until they understand their duty to the public (seek and print the truth) they do not deserve your support.  I will be making a formal complaint to

Bureau of Accuracy/Public Editor

You can contact the Star’s Bureau of Accuracy and Public Editor by email at publiced@thestar.ca; by phone at 416-869-4949; or by fax at 416-869-4322

To cancel your subscription or to let the Star know how you feel –(added)Customer Service (including subscription inquiries, delivery issues, billing inquiries, vacation stops or other customer service inquiries or complaints)
Email: circmail@thestar.ca
Phone: 416-367-4500 or 1-800-268-9213

TheStar.com

Windmills vs. Nimbyism (another take on the article above)

Wind turbines cause health problems, residents say – CTV News

OPTIONS FOR COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS IN ONTARIO

Premier, Dalton McGuinty Talks About Renewable Energy For Ontario

Homeowners living near windfarms see property values plummet

Is Nimby the new “N” Word

John Gerretsen, M.P

January 13, 2009

By Ron Stephens
Independent candidate for Grey – Bruce

The letter below is from Hugh Christopher Brown of Wolfe Island, Ontario.

He, like many others in this province, is frustrated with the Minister of Environment. From the office of Premier McGuinty to the office of your local MPP, the government has shown absolute disrespect for the citizens of this province.

From the dismantling of Ont. Hydro by Maurice Strong, the father of Kyoto, to the present day, our electrical system has been guided, not by those who understand our electrical systems and the needs of the province, but by the E8, another Maurice Strong product, and Agenda 21 from the UN.

Our electrical system has been sold off, and the citizens and manufacturing sector are being fed to the wolves.

It would not matter which party is in power. They have all bought into the idea of rule by the UN. Sustainability they like to call it. Sustainability means giving up our rights and freedoms to an outside entity.

Treason, if you will.

Every political party in this province will push wind farms to appease the “Green Movement”. Why? Because they are gutless traitors.

The govt. cannot present a case to defend their actions, because other than Green rhetoric, there is no case.

Nowhere in the world has wind energy proven it’s worth. The Danes are fighting against wind farms in Denmark, birthplace of modern day wind energy.

Germany, home to more wind power than any other country is building 26 coal plants. Why? Wind is not doing the job, nor will it ever.

Denmark saw wind as a clean alternative. It is a very small country of 5 million, yet it is heavily dependent on it’s neighbours for it’s power.

Enron discovered they could make a lot of money and gain control of large portions of the American grid by jumping on the “Global Warming” wagon.

Clinton, Gore and Maurice Strong were all involved in helping Enron.

Through subsidies and tax benefits, combined with their natural gas interests, there was billions to be made.

Nothing has changed. The wind industry of today is the ghost of Enron reborn, and it’s just as evil.

Don’t take my word, do your own research.

Please support the people of Wolfe Island and the many other communities threatened by wind farms by sending your thoughts to the Minister of the Environment.

.

April 12, 2008

Mr. John Gerretsen, M.P

Minister of the Environment

135 St. Clair Ave W., 15th Floor

Toronto, Ontario

M4V 1P5
RE: WOLFE ISLAND WIND PROJECT – APPEAL REQUEST FOR EA
Dear Mr. Gerretsen:
I am in absolute disbelief that an individual Environmental

Assessment has been denied for this project.

CREC has obliged itself to deliver a wind plant with nameplate

capacity of 197.8 megawatts, to be operational by October 2008.
In a letter to Shelia Allen, dated January 4 2008, Ontario Projects

Manager Geoff Carnegie refers to financial penalties to be imposed by

the OPA should CREC fail to deliver on this obligation.
In the same letter, Mr Carnegie also comments on the economic

“non-viability” of turbine deactivation or removal, and allows that

CREC will counter adverse effects only by employing “commercially

reasonable” efforts.
So Mr. Gerretsen, am I to understand that a private energy company is

taking money to fulfill a production quota, self site a power plant,

and now declares itself immune to accountability on financial basis?
I do not need to go into great detail about the social and

environmental uniqueness of Wolfe Island. You have been well furnished

with documents to that effect. You know that this island sits at the

head of the biggest estuary on the planet, is on the flight path of a

significant number of migratory species, and is the nesting site for

many endangered species. You also know as a CLASS IV IBA, Wolfe Island

would not even qualify for this development were the proposal made

today.
You are also well aware that not a single turbine has been moved in

response to the

many recommendations of Environment Canada, Ministry of Natural Resources,

Ducks Unlimited and the Kingston Field Naturalists. So what exactly is

going on?
You have attended a conciliatory BBQ with optioned landowners and

told concerned citizens that you “like the look of windmills”.
You are the Minister of The Environment, and you demand nothing more

of corporations than they self regulate their practices as much as is

‘commercially reasonable’ ?
I am well aware of the political risks of criticising wind energy. I

also know that if these projects are done recklessly, it jeopardizes

the future of wind development in our country.
You need look no further than our divided community, or the price of

real estate Melanthon to see where a lack of policy is getting us.

Does your party want to go down as the builders of sustainability,

viable public infrastructure, or the contractors of political

expedience? To choose the later risks not only your legacy, but as I

stated, that of the industry itself.
I like the look of windmills too. I like the clusters of 4-5 you

see outside of Danish villages, or the 20 in Copenhagen’s harbour.

Denmark is the leader in renewable energy, has decades of experience

in wind harnessing, uses minimum setbacks of two kilometres, and

practices the environmentally meaningful method of energy production:

‘use at source’. This is not the paradigm being followed here.
Our constituency is further insulted that we are left to the mercy

of absurd ‘post construction mitigation’, carried out at the

discretion of a company which has lied to us with promises of turbine

deactivation in the event of high avian mortality, noise, ice throw or

other perils. Mr Carnegie’s letter lets us know this form of

mitigation is actually an autopsy. Once our habitats are desecrated,

CREC proposes buying land elsewhere and “creating new sites with

desirable habitat features”. So much for good old conservation. I

would call this level of vanity ‘Biblical’.
If a bump-up is denied , we will take every political and legal

measure to bring this ill-informed green washing to light. As a

musician who travels the world, I have watched communities grow up

quickly in the face of political opportunists. I am no longer asked in

interviews what my problem with wind power is, but where is my

government in all this?
I would like to say that it is working with due diligence to secure

meaningful and sustainable practises. Today those are definitely not

the words I use. Give our island the respect of full environmental

assessment, and let us implement appropriate safeguards to protect the

environment and your constituents. Anything less implicates a

dedicated ignorance or ulterior motive.
Sincerely,
Hugh Christopher Brown

Wolfe Island, Ontario

c.c.
Lynn Moore, Chair

Wolfe Island Residents for the Environment

792 Fairfax Dr., Kingston, Ontario K7M 4V7
c.c.
Dalton McGuinty, Premier

Legislative Building

Queen’s Park

Toronto, Ontario M7A 1A1

dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
Mr. Robert W. Runciman

Room 436, Main Legislative Building

Toronto ON M7A 1A4

rwrunciman@brockville.com
John Yakabuski

Official Opposition Energy Critic

Queen’s Park

Room 202, N.W., Legislative building

Toronto, Ontario M7A lA8

john.yakabuski@pc.ola.org
Ted Arnott

Tourism Critic PC

181 St. Andrew St E, 2nd Flr

Fergus ON N1M 1P9

ted.arnott@pc.ola.org
Ms. Peggy Smith, Solicitor

160 Johnson St.,

Kingston, Ontario K7L 1Y1

middle@kos.net
Mr. John Tory, PC Leader,

Room 200, NW, Legislative Bldg,

Queen’s Park, Toronto, Ontario M7A lA8

leader@ontariopc.net
Ms. Elizabeth May, Leader

Green Party of Canada

P.O. Box 997, Station B

Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5R1

leader@greenparty.ca

Is the govt. being honest about wind energy

December 10, 2008

poll results

wind turbines towering over farm

Is the govt. being honest about wind energy

Yes (198)
No (840)
Don’t Know (83)

Total votes: 1121

Premier, Dalton McGuinty Talks About Renewable Energy For Ontario

Before You Sign a Wind Turbine Contract

Wind farm chases couple from Wolfe Island – Ontario

November 12, 2008

Editor: Just wait until the wind farm is built. Then the real problems begin.

There is nothing green about the wind industry unless you count the cash. If anyone else tried to destroy the land and and flyways the greens would be having a fit.

.

Wind farm chases couple from Wolfe Island

When Dawn and Dean Wallace moved to Wolfe Island 17 years ago, they fell in love with the peaceful, slow pace of life in the rural community.

It quickly became home and they planned to retire on the island.

That has all changed. The couple feels that construction of one of Canada’s largest wind-power projects has forced them out of the community and they’re in the process of moving off the island into a home they’ve bought northwest of Kingston in Camden East.

“It’s ironic that the very thing that’s supposed to be green has had such a negative impact on us,” said Dawn Wallace.

“It’s a green project without a green process.”

The couple lived at the corner of Baseline Road and 5th Line – at the heart of the construction zone – where dozens of trucks moved past their house daily on their way to and from a quarry that supplied stone to build the access roads and cement foundations for the wind turbines.

As a result, the Wallaces spent this past summer wearing earplugs and avoided spending time at home.

The noise and dust from dozens of trucks and heavy pieces of equipment moving past their property, at times starting as early as 4 a. m., made life almost unbearable.

They didn’t even cut their lawn until Thanksgiving weekend because of the dust.

“I have one word for it: hell,” said Wallace, a high school teacher.

The couple has documented the dust and noise by posting video footage on YouTube, which is available by searching the online site using the keywords Wolfe Island wind.

To get some relief from the noise and dust, they called the Township of Frontenac Islands, the Ministry of the Environment and the company building the wind plant, Canadian Hydro Developers Inc.

But the Wallaces say they got no relief. The trucks kept coming.

“It was very difficult to get help,” she said. “At the end of the day, it was unbearable and we got no support.”

That wasn’t completely a surprise for the Wallaces, who watched as tension grew in the community between those who supported the project and those who had concerns about the location of the wind turbines. Angry disagreements occurred at public meetings.

“[Opponents] had to endure such terrible, painful social pressures from certain members of the community for speaking out about certain aspects of the process,”Wallace said.

“What was once a community of solidarity that we contributed [to] and benefited from has become a community divided, which is very painful.”

It all became too much for the Wallaces, whose departure comes just as the project’s first turbines are being erected.

Mammoth and pre-eminent on the rural landscape, the 125-metre-high turbines are visible for miles along the western portion of the island. The giant machines tower high above what were once dormant farmers’ fields.

In the coming months, workers will be using giant cranes to erect a total of 86 turbines along the western side of the island. The project is anticipated to be up and running by April 1, 2009.

By Jennifer Pritchett
Whig-Standard Environmental Reporter

The Kingston Whig-Standard for full story

.

Proposed Wolfe Island Cement Factory 20m from Lake Ontario

link to construction phase

Wolfe Island Wind Turbines: Life on the Front Lines

Wind turbine noise – Suncor wind farm Ripley



Germany Plans Boom in Coal-Fired Power Plants

November 8, 2008

Editor: I originally posted this article last year,  I think it’s time to re-post it.

The govt. of Ontario, the wind industry and the likes of David Suzuki , Al Gore (and now Obama) are forever ranting on about how we should follow Germany and Denmark.

We must build wind farms and we must close the “evil” coal plants or face the wrath of the “carbon bogey man.”

Both Germany and Denmark have far higher emission levels than Canada and their electricity costs are much higher than ours.Compare the numbers

So – why would our govt. want to follow their example. The IEA ( the internationalization of energy via the UN) The best people to ask would be Maurice Strong and David Suzuki.

Maurice Strong is hiding out in China, so why not send Suzuki a letter or give him a call. Strong is an honorary board member of the Suzuki Foundation and Strong got Suzuki’s daughter a job with the UN.

Follow the connection between Al Gore and Maurice Strong


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

to generate a high volume of CO2 credits and revenue so as to be financially attractive.

Once accomplished, the building of large coal plants, nuclear and large scale hydro projects will begin.

Germany has already built the wind farms and are now building the coal plants.

This is all about “the new carbon economy” where you will be forced to pay taxes on C02 – a harmless gas.

How big is the scam?

Enbridge wind farm Kincardine

Enbridge wind farm Kincardine

HUGE!

Germany Plans Boom in Coal-Fired Power Plants — Despite High Emissions

By Roland Nelles

03/21/2007

Everyone in Germany is talking about climate protection — everyone, that is, except for energy companies. They’re planning to build dozens of new coal-fired power plants — with the support of the governing coalition in Berlin.

<!–
OAS_RICH(‘Middle2’);
// –>

Coal-fired power plants produce a lot of CO2. Chancellor Angela Merkel wants to reduce emissions but is supporting the building of more power plants.

The environment certainly seems to be in safe hands at the German chancellery in central Berlin, located next to the leafy Tiergarten park. Global warming and climate change is German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s current favorite topic.

Business opportunities

But the new plants are a big business opportunity for Germany’s four major energy providers, Vattenfall, RWE, E.on and EnBW. Coal imports from South Africa or Poland are relatively cheap and can be used to produce electricity and heat at a high profit. In this way, the companies intend to secure their dominant position on the German market for decades to come.

And German politicians are explicitly encouraging them to do so. Both Merkel and Gabriel have an interest in the power plant construction boom.

For Merkel, the case is clear-cut: New power plants will secure thousands of jobs in Germany. The projects resemble a giant program for the stimulation of the economy. The power plant operators plan to invest more than €30 billion ($40 billion) in construction and infrastructure.

Jobs are also a strong motivation for Gabriel and the SPD. Workers in the energy sector, who are members of the powerful trade unions for mining, chemistry, energy and services, are traditionally SPD voters. The party doesn’t want to make political decisions that hurt their interests. Energy security is another argument Gabriel and his colleagues like to invoke: Germany must not become dependent on Russian natural gas, they say.

But something else is even more important for the Social Democrats. They want the planned power plants to help bridge the electricity gap that will inevitably arise in coming years due to the phasing out of nuclear energy. Germany’s previous governing coalition between the SPD and the Green Party decided in 2001 that Germany would abandon nuclear energy — and Gabriel and his colleagues will not allow the decision to be reversed. If the SPD were to question the construction of new coal-fired power plants, it would inevitably have to rethink its schedule for closing down Germany’s nuclear power plants.

Political support

And so German energy companies can plan and construct their new high-emission facilities with the support of politicians. Giant plants are to be built across Germany, from North Rhine-Westphalia, the Saarland, Hesse and Schleswig-Holstein to Baden-Württemberg.

A total of 12 plants are being planned or built in North Rhine-Westphalia alone.

The coal business is also booming in former East Germany, where brown coal or lignite is traditionally extracted in open pit mines. Saxony-Anhalt alone is thought to have reserves in the order of 10.9 billion tons. Merkel has explicitly encouraged energy companies to invest in coal-burning: “Germany has considerable natural resources in the form of brown coal which we shouldn’t downplay,” she told an audience of businesspeople last year.

Full article here

Green Initiatives Get Slaughtered in California, Will Media Notice?

November 7, 2008

Editor: I believe there’s a saying – new trends start in California. Lets hope this trend spreads far and wide and fast.

Green Initiatives Get Slaughtered in California, Will Media Notice?

By Noel Sheppard

Californians by very wide margins defeated two green initiatives that anthropogenic global warming enthusiasts in the media and in legislative houses across the fruited plain should take heed…but will they?

To begin with, Proposition 7 would have required utilities to generate 40 percent of their power from renewable energy by 2020 and 50 percent by 2025.

Proposition 10 would have created $5 billion in general obligation bonds to help consumers and others purchase certain high fuel economy or alternative fuel vehicles, and to fund research into alternative fuel technology.

Much to the likely chagrin of Nobel Laureate Al Gore and his global warming sycophants in the media, these measures went down, and went down in flames:

Proposition 7 Renewable Energy Generation
Yes 3,294,158 35.1%
No 6,102,907 64.9%

Proposition 10 Alternative Fuel Vehicles
Yes 3,742,997 40.1%
No 5,581,303 59.9%

Will global warming-obsessed media share this news with the citizenry? Shouldn’t this be HUGE news given President-elect Obama’s green sympathies and his desire to enact a carbon cap and trade scheme to reduce carbon dioxide emissions? We’ll see.

ICECAP

Wind farm opponents turn up heat – Wind Concerns Ontario

October 31, 2008

Editor:

I’m going to go through this article by Tyler Hamilton and critique it. I’ll include some of my experiences and thoughts as well. My critique will be added in italics. Having spent over two years studying wind farms, having read and studied thousands of pages of documents from around the world, attending many council meetings and an OMB hearing, I believe I’m qualified to discuss the subject in an objective manner.

Ron Stephens

Wind farm opponents turn up heat

Province wary of small but effective groups as it aims to beef up renewable energy plan.
Oct 30, 2008 04:30 AM

Energy Reporter Toronto Star( Shill for the wind industry – I say that because of his absolute lack of objectivity)

Opponents to wind farms in Ontario, at the best of times a local thorn in the side of wind-energy developers, have suddenly realized the benefit of getting organized.( see what I mean )Earlier this week a new anti-wind group called Wind Concerns Ontario, a coalition of 22 small rural groups each fighting their own community battles, announced its creation as a “strong, unified voice of opposition” to provincial plans that would see thousands of industrial wind turbines “tearing apart the very fabric of rural Ontario.”
They emphasize the “industrial” nature of wind turbines and their danger to birds and bats. They say the machines are noisy, make some people sick, kill local tourism and cause the real estate values of surrounding properties to fall. (All true statements, backed by facts)
Wind turbine noise affects health

Homeowners living near windfarms see property values plummet)

When those complaints don’t stick, they attack the technology as being a fraud. “It does not in reality produce `green’ energy, does not reduce CO2 emissions significantly and is inefficient,” said Beth Harrington, spokesperson for the new coalition and head of the Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County, where several onshore and offshore wind projects are being planned.

(True – Wind energy has been promoted as being able to significantly reduce emissions, even though there is no evidence to support the claim.)

The increasingly vocal opposition, however small compared to those who more quietly support wind power in Ontario, isn’t lost on the Liberal government, which is counting on new renewable-energy projects as part of a plan to wean the province from coal-fired power generation by 2014.

(The so-called “quiet support” comes from people who got sucked in by the propaganda machine or never did any research on the subject)

In September, Energy and Infrastructure Minister George Smitherman directed the power authority to beef up an already ambitious renewable-energy plan, much of it dependent on massive new wind farms being erected across the province and on the Great Lakes.

(George Smitherman just recently took over the Ministry of Energy. So the question that needs to be asked is – What does Smitherman actually know about the energy needs of Ont. From his actions so far I feel safe in saying – not much. As Health Minister he thought it was prudent to have our seniors sit in dirty diaper until they were 70% full)

Smitherman, who will be in Shelburne today opening Canada’s largest wind farm, told the Star he’s committed to engaging the public in meaningful discussions as the plan moves forward. “But we also recognize that work needs to be done to ensure that momentum on the goal of a cleaner and green energy future isn’t diminished.”

(Meaningful discussions should be read as – drink the Kool-Aid or we’ll call you names ie: Nimby’s. That does not constitute meaningful discussions. He also forgot to mention the people already forced to move as a result of the first phase of the project)

This will require a streamlining of rules and regulations so they better balance community concerns with the need to move projects forward, industry observers say. A practical start, some suggest, is to establish environmental pre-screening of projects to weed out the good from the bad.

(This should read – The govt. and wind industry will decide where wind farms go and local councils will be bypassed.)

Behind the scenes the government is working on such improvements, sources say, including the creation of a Green Energy Act that would give priority to renewable energy and conservation as the province updates and expands its electricity system.

(Read – end of local democratic rights)

Some have grown impatient. EPCOR Utilities Inc. earlier this month canceled a $300-million wind farm in Goderich. After years of delay, the company said it couldn’t wait any longer for provincial and municipal approvals, which in some cases had been slowed by a handful of protesters.

( I attended many council meetings concerning the Epcor-Kingsbridge ll wind farm near Goderich and I never saw a protester. I did meet people who were lied to in order to construct Kingsbridge l . People who suffered from health, noise and stray voltage problems. I saw Epcor  walk out of council  meetings twice  and say they were done. Why? Because people wanted answers to questions that the wind company couldn’t or refused to answer.

They should have left, but the govt. kept saying they would fix things. I saw junk engineering reports – anything to try and ram the project through. I believe there has been a formal complaint lodged because of those engineering reports.

We, a small group of dedicated citizens, farmers and landowners, including one dedicated councilor held up Kingsbridge ll for over a year. In that time I witnessed what can only be described as total and complete disrespect for people, their rights, their health, their property and the truth.

In the end a 450 meter setback was adopted – the same setback that was put forward over a year earlier, even though the people suffering ill effects from Kingsbridge l were all outside the 450 meter setback. The councilor who stood up for his constituents said “I was told  by lawyers that any setback over 450 meters would prompt an OMB hearing at a cost to the township of $100.000 and that we would lose.”

Epcor recently released a statement stating they were withdrawing from the Kinsbridge ll wind farm because they would be unable to have the project up and operational by Oct.31st. of this year. They had to know that at least a year ago – so what gives?

This is speculation on my part, but I believe the Epcor withdrawal will be used as the excuse the govt. has been looking for to bypass local councils.

So much for democracy!)


Closer to home, Toronto Hydro got a taste of things to come this week as it considers construction of an offshore wind farm off the Scarborough Bluffs. It was forced on Monday evening to cancel its first community information meeting because more than 400 people showed up – twice as many as the church hall could hold.

Nearly 200 people lined up outside were greeted by someone from a group called SOS Windfarms Toronto (the SOS stands for Stop Offshore) who was handing out business cards that promote a website.

Along with some valid concerns, the site also contains misleading or wrong information, such as claims that the wind farm is being promoted as the only green solution for Toronto and that 80 years of aviation data show the site is inappropriate for wind generation.

(If you want misleading or wrong information go to the CanWEA site or the Govt. of Ont. site,or read the writing of Tyler Hamilton. They are masters of the art.)

“I think a lot of people are making judgments based on information that I would say is incorrect,” said Keith Stewart, an energy expert with WWF-Canada. “Rational argument can win over the majority, but it can’t win over everyone.”

(There goes Tyler Hamilton again – describing Keith Stewart of the WWF as an energy expert. Keith Stewart has a PhD in political science from York University, where he studied environmental politics. I see nothing that would suggest he is an energy expert.

I thought the focus of the WWF was trying to save the ‘not endangered polar bear’. Maybe Mr. Stewart would be of more use in the high arctic.

I want to hear from the engineers – the people who understand and build electrical systems,  not politicians and lobby groups)

Stewart said some ecologically sensitive locations are clearly not appropriate for wind farms, and that’s part of the reason why government has to create guidelines.

Full article at Toronto Star

(It was CanWEA that requested the govt. not impose setbacks and the govt. agreed to the request.)

First, the relatively small size of private land parcels in Ontario will present a challenge for developers due to the number of stakeholders that may perceive impacts. Windpark development may become uneconomical if municipal setbacks created to address these “perceived” concerns reduce the usable land area, thus eliminating the economics of scale necessary to develop a project.*
*14c) The Industry does not recommend that a set of standard bylaws be adopted with respect to setbacks or other municipal zoning issues.*

(*”The above can be understood to mean, that if “safe setbacks” are mandated, it will make it uneconomical to site wind farms in Southern Ontario”)

(If Tyler Hamilton, the Govt. or CanWEA think they can subdue the rising state of awareness concerning the reality of wind farms, they are mistaken in their misguided belief, just as they are being dishonest when telling the public that wind farms will significantly cut CO2 emissions or are capable replacing a fossil fuel plant.

During a conversation I had with the senior policy adviser for the Ministry of Energy, I mentioned that  my research suggested the best plan for Ontario’ s electrical needs was to put the scrubbers on the coal plants and build a nuke. He agreed with my assessment.  Cost -10 billion for a system that is both environmentally sound and cost effective. McGuinty has continually refused to put the scrubbers on the coal plants, putting the health of thousands at risk)

McGuinty’s plan – 60+ billion for an unstable, overly expensive and is no healthier than the one proposed by myself and  accepted as sound by the policy adviser.

When I asked why this was happening, he answered “politics” – try heating your home with politics.)

Premier, Dalton McGuinty Talks About Renewable Energy For Ontario

Premier, Dalton McGuinty powers a press conference with wind energy