Archive for the ‘real estate in kincardine ontario’ 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

Is wind power a lot of hot air?

May 30, 2008

Editor:
This is part of a response I wrote to a comment from Mark Aug.2007

Mark
Let me try this. I just checked the energy output numbers for the province of Ontario. At 10am today the 400 MW of wind in Ont. were producing 4MW or 1% of their plated capacity. If you think wind is going to power Ontario or anywhere else you are dreaming. Most wind farms are to backed up by natural gas plants. Expensive and great emitters of ground level ozone which in fact is more dangerous than the emissions from the coal plants.
Maybe this will help you understand.
France is powered by 80% nukes 10% fossil fuel and 10% hydro. France is slated for 5000 windmills. You can’t use nukes to back up wind and they only have 10% hydro power. Wind has to have a back up of at least 80%. In order to do this the only option is to add more fossil fuels. So in order for France to use wind they must in fact add to the pollution levels not decrease them.

Ron

atomcat
August 11, 2007

Now some information from France
April 2008

.

Is wind power a lot of hot air?

President of the environmental company, Fédération Environnement Durable, Jean-Louis Butré, has labelled the drive for wind energy “a strategic error on a national scale.” He says wind energy actually increases demands on thermal energy reserves.

He said: “Wind turbines only work 20% of the time so we need to have back-up energy – in France this comes from thermal energy and natural gas, in Germany it comes from burning fossil fuels.

“So the more we rely on wind energy, the more we are actually producing gases which contribute to the ozone effect.”

Mr Butré believes the cost of wind energy is prohibitive.

“Wind energy costs two to three times the price of other forms of electricity, which would result in people paying an extra €200 or €300 for each electricity bill.

The homes of residents living near a turbine may also be worth 30% less.

“France is a country which relies on tourists yet turbines are ruining our landscape.”

Germany, currently the leader in wind energy and considering a ban on nuclear energy, has just ordered the construction of more than 20 power stations using coal as an energy source, as a back-up energy supply.

Expats Kath and Ian Haines moved to the peaceful hamlet of Peusicot near Genouillé (Poitou-Charentes) last year, unaware that a wind park with eight 135m turbines was to be built just 650m from their door.

Now they fear their house will be worth a third of the original price and worry how the turbines will affect their health.

Mr Haines said: “Everyone knew about the turbines but no one – not the mayor, estate agent or members of a local group campaigning against the turbines, said anything until two weeks after we had moved in. It was like a bombshell – we felt devastated.

“We are worried about possible nervous complaints as a result of vibrations from the turbines, and they are supposed to be noisy at night.

“We have been told it will take two years to set up the turbines and we are worried about how large machines and road traffic will fit down the tiny lane.

“We expect our property to drop by at least one third in value. The turbines will affect wildlife, bird migration, everything.”

Wind generated electricity is more expensive to produce, costing between €40 and €55 per megawatt hour compared to coal and gas which cost €30 and €45 per megawatt hour to produce.

The cheapest energy form is nuclear, costing just €26 to produce.

Source The Connexion

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

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

wind turbines and Property Value – Real Life Experience

October 14, 2007
North Country Advocates wind turbines and property value – real life experience

`My spouse and I have a home to sell in the village of Malone. One prospective buyer, pre-approved for a loan, had a list of items that were “deal breakers” for the bank. Among those terms and conditions of the property site were: 1.) It not be located on a landfill, 2.) It not be constructed near an oil spill or any identified DEC site and … 3.) It not be near “windmills” as the term was said. So much for no loss of property value. Here we have a local bank who will not approve a loan if the property is near “windmills”.

Have you seen the ones that are constructed just beyond Chateaugay?
Horrifying!!

Beth Mosher

North_Country_Advocates

Please visit site. They have all but banned wind farms. They also explain in detail the cost of wind energy. Very good piece.

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

July 9, 2007

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Complete Story

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

Centerville Citizens Challenge Wind Farm Law

March 22, 2007

March 18, 2007

***FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE***

Centerville Citizens Challenge Wind Farm Law


Lawsuit filed in Allegany County Supreme Court seeks nullification
A group of landowners in the Town of Centerville filed suit Friday alleging the town board worked hand-inhand with Noble Environmental Power, LLC, to craft a local law that accommodates Noble’s proposed Centerville Windpark, but without looking at the environmental impacts. The project would add at least 60 wind turbines, each about fifty stories high, to Noble’s Bliss Windpark in the Town of Eagle. Sixty-seven wind turbines have already been approved in Eagle. A comparable wind farm is planned by Noble in the Town of Farmersville in Cattaraugus County.

According to Dennis Gaffin, a professor at Buffalo State College and president of Centerville’s Concerned Citizens, “Many of us knocked ourselves out finding the most objective studies of noise and other effects of industrial wind turbines and submitted our research to the town board, but they said they would not look at it until later, when Noble submits a formal application.” Noble approached the town board with a proposal in January 2006, and paid for an environmental attorney to draft a law the board enacted last November.

George Ellis, a member of the citizens group, thinks the town board was misled. “I’m a farmer. Supervisor Sardina thinks a wind farm will save farming in Centerville. I think he and the farmers got snookered.”

“These are primarily investment schemes taking advantage of lucrative tax breaks,” according to the group’s attorney Gary Abraham. “The public pays billions in lost taxes and there is little regulation except at the local level. Landowners get a small rental payment if a wind turbine is operated on their land. But the value of property all around them plummets.”

The Centerville town board decided a 1,000-foot buffer to a dwelling is safe, except hunting camps are excluded from the protection. “That’s not enough” for Cheryl Sporysz, a member of the group suing the town. “My neighbors signed easements with Noble that allow a wind turbine within 500 feet of my property. Most independent studies recommend a setback of one mile. If Noble gets its way, I’ll have to stay away from the area between my house my property line.”

“We believe we can show the buffer areas required under the town law were determined by the easement agreements Noble made with landowners well in advance of the local law. In fact the town board reduced the buffer and excluded hunting camps that were protected in an earlier version of the law when Noble complained,” according to Mr. Abraham. “State law requires environmental review at the earliest possible time in the development of a project, but here the town decided to do no review until after buffer distances are in place.”

LAW OFFICE OF GARY A. ABRAHAM
170 No. Second Street
Allegany, New York 14706
716-372-1913; fax is same (please call first)

gabraham44@eznet.net
http://www.garyabraham.com

Wind Turbine Setbacks-UPDATE Sept.11 2007-

January 25, 2007

From the editor

Manitoba gets the first realistic setback in Canada. The people in Manitoba fought back and instead of a 500 meter setback they now have a more realistic 2000 meter from their property lines. In Ontario the setbacks are from the residence, not the property line, which makes the 450 meter setback in the Municipality of Kincardine and most other places even more ludicrous and unacceptable. I would like to take this opportunity to encourage everyone everywhere to fight for their and their neighbors rights.

You don’t have to put up with this crap.

Rural Municipality of Cartier Manitoba
Some residents voiced their displeasure with the project at the public hearing. Rasmussen said most residents were concerned about the distance turbines would be located from property lines according to the zoning bylaw.

The bylaw passed first reading by a 5-1 council vote in June. Since then, set back guidelines for erecting the turbines changed from 500 metres from neighbouring property lines to 2,000 metres.

Read the rest of the story and get inspired

Riverside County-CALIFORNIA-Restrict the placement of wind turbines within 2 miles of residential development unless the applicant supplies documentation that the machine(s) will not produce low frequency impulsive noise.

Turbines too close to homes-Ms. Lucas, speaking for the Guardians, told the hearing commissioners that the 70 wind turbines proposed for the hills southwest of Makara, each 125 meters tall, were too large to put within two kilometers of any residence. International research showed it was “general protocol” to allow a 2km buffer, even with smaller turbines.

In NZ there were no consented wind energy developments with more than a handful of houses closer than 2km. (Source-Walkato Times)

Australia-To avoid adverse noise impacts on the amenity of the surrounding community, wind farm developments should include sufficient buffers or setbacks to noise sensitive premises. As a guide, the distance between the nearest turbine and a noise sensitive building not associated with the wind farm is to be 1km. These guidelines provide that wind farm developments should be constructed and designed to ensure that noise generated will not exceed 5dB(A) above the background sound level or 35dB(A) using a 10-minute LA eq, whichever is greater, at surrounding noise-sensitive premises. (Source-Guidelines for Wind Farm Development, Planning Bulletin, Western Australia)

Australia-Wind Farm Under Scrutiny. The Myponga/Sellicks Hill wind farm will be scrutinized after claims that developer TrustPower plans to move seven of the turbines within one kilometer of dwellings. (Source-The Times)

(1600 metres in Germany, 1800 metres in Holland).

It was Alves-Pereira’s initial research, published in numerous scientific journals, which prompted the French National Academy of Medicine, earlier this month (March 2006), to call on the French government to stop all wind turbine construction within 1.5 km of people’s homes. You should understand that VAD is well established in the clinical literature; it is not conjectured. It has been amply documented and is readily detected by a variety of diagnostic tests.

What’s wrong with Ontario Canada!

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”

Setbacks in Ashfield township 400 meters

Setbacks in Municipality of Kincardine 350 meters

“Ontario’s strict sound guidelines ensure that turbines are located far enough away from residences .” What Ontario guidelines? Every municipality is left to figure it out for themselves. Chatham Kent: 300 m, Amherstburg 600 m.

Meanwhile worldwide, in countries that have learned from their mistakes, these distances are increasing due to health, quality of life and safety issues (1600 metres in Germany, 1800 metres in Holland).

You should make people aware, Mr. Hornung that CanWEA is lobbying to remove setbacks altogether in southwestern Ontario due to the small land parcels.

 

Is the Ont. govt. ignoring health issues and the right of property enjoyment for economies of scale. That’s what it sounds like to me. The wind industry is always using the term “perceived” concerns. The concerns that people have are real not “perceived”.

Dalton and Duncan need a reality check. The rights of the people of Ont. are far more important than a bunch of useless windmills.

Germany has more windmills than anyone else. They are building 8 new coal plants because wind isn’t working for them. The Danes don’t want them either, their govt. is forcing them on their people. Why? They have 30.000 people working in the industry.

“We simply cannot continue to lead the world in the field of wind-power technology if we don’t even make room for wind parks in our own country,” Connie Hedegaard, the environment minister for Denmark said“.

Dalton and Dwight or Dumb and Dumber you be the judge

 

Wind Turbine Video

January 18, 2007

Video of wind turbines from Pennsylvania.
This video shows what wind turbines have done to the landscape, the people and property values in their area.

Dial up

Hi Speed