Posts Tagged ‘Toronto Star’

No future for wind in Ontario

March 2, 2009
Editor:
Received this story from a reader this morning. I had to rub my eyes several times before I could believe what I was reading and in the Toronto Star no less.
Someone that understands electrical generation writing the truth about wind generation. Wow!
I and thousands of others have been saying the same thing for years. All the articles until the last few days seem to be written by one “green group” or another pushing wind and telling us about their vision.
All I can say is try heating your home or running your business on a vision.
Put the scrubbers on the coal plants and build a nuke- cost 10 billion and it will provide clean reliable energy for the Province. (C02 is not a pollutant)
The vision 60-80 billion ( money that is not going to health care, education, agriculture or many other places the money would be better used)  and the air won’t be any cleaner.
The truth is getting out but will this be enough to stop the madness presently found at Queens’ Park. Don’t forget both the Conservatives and the NDP have bought into and have been promoting this same “MAD” vision.
I have included the emails for all MPP’s in this Province at the end of the article. Take a minute and send them your thoughts.
Remember between 50 and 70 billion will wasted on the “Mad Vision” That doesn’t count the millions or billions wasted to date in the massive promotion of this “Mad Vision”
Wind is and always was about the creation of carbon credits. Not cleaner air.
The “Green sales pitch” has run out of Air, Wind and Gas
.
No future for wind in Ontario

PATRICK CORRIGAN/TORONTO STAR

Need for support from gas-powered plants means it’s also not even very green
Mar 02, 2009 04:30 AM



The Ontario government says its new Green Energy Act, if passed, will help Ontario become “North America’s leader in renewable energy.”

But since most of this new renewable energy will be from wind, it may not be the smartest move for Ontario because its large hydro and nuclear capacity is not compatible with wind generation. Wind requires natural gas-fired generation for support and natural gas will be a most precarious fuel for Ontario.

The future of industrial wind power in Ontario is tied to natural gas-fired electricity generation and that, as will be seen, is unsustainable. The Ontario power grid needs flexible support to keep supply and demand in balance, and providing this support will be made more difficult when we add the vagaries of wind.

Although nuclear units can handle the daily and weekend changes in electricity demand, they have limited capability for the kind of frequent power-up and power-down requirements that would be needed for this support. Furthermore, hydroelectric plants may not always be available due to fluctuations in water supply and water management agreements.

Even without restrictions on nuclear and hydro, it makes little economic sense to run reliable suppliers of steady power, with high fixed costs and low operating costs, at reduced output to support the expensive, intermittent and varying output from wind farms.

So, with coal being phased out by 2014, natural gas-fired generation will have to be used to support wind. Due to the simultaneous demands of home heating and electricity generation in the winter, that may lead to gas shortages. So some of these plants may be dual fuelled with gas and oil, which is not a pleasant thought.

The Ontario government is putting too much faith in natural gas for electricity generation, as the United Kingdom did with its “dash for gas” from the North Sea in the 1990s when gas was cheap. Now the U.K. is in terrible shape with its gas running out and the threat of power shortages in the next decade.

There is no long-term future for gas-fired generation in Ontario because of greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, rising costs, the demands on gas for other uses (in the tar sands, the chemical industry, home heating, exports to the United States), declining reserves, the questionable security of foreign supplies or, in short, the waste of a premium non-renewable resource just to generate electricity.

Since Ontario’s wind generators require natural-gas-fired generation for support, this creates an uncertain future for wind turbines and their transmission infrastructure that one day will not be compatible with a nuclear/hydro powered grid. Nor is there an environmental benefit to adding wind to a clean nuclear/hydro grid.

There is an alternative to building more natural gas-fired power plants in the Greater Toronto Area and other locations to replace the coal-fired stations. That is to increase the arbitrary limit on nuclear from the 14,000 megawatts imposed by the government. Bruce Power showed its willingness to build new nuclear power plants last October when it asked the nuclear safety regulator for a licence to prepare a site at Nanticoke, in addition to new units at the Bruce site.

The government’s power plan envisages nuclear supplying 40 per cent of electricity demand by 2027. This should be raised to more than 70 per cent, with hydro supplying most of the remainder. If there is no market for nuclear-generated electricity during off-peak and overnight hours (for power exports, recharging electric cars, producing hydrogen and/or compressed air for generating clean peaking power and other uses), the plants can reduce their output to meet the demand. This means that even if practical wind energy storage were available, wind still would not be needed on a future all nuclear/hydro grid.

The demand on the grid from recharging electric cars should not be underestimated. The president and CEO of French nuclear giant Areva said that it would take an additional 6,400 megawatts of electricity if just 10 per cent of France’s cars were electrically powered. That translates into about 1,700 megawatts (two Darlington-size units) for Ontario.

In France, the nuclear energy share of electricity production is about 78 per cent from its 58 reactors, with the balance divided nearly equally between hydro and fossil, and with the nuclear units able to meet daily changes in electricity demand. Sweden has a grid the same size as Ontario’s but with almost all nuclear/hydro generation.

Wind has no long-term future in Ontario and will be more of a hindrance than a help to the grid’s reliability. The Ontario Energy Board should take a good hard look at the government’s Integrated Power System Plan, eliminate wind and promote cleaned-up coal-fired stations operating past 2014 until sufficient nuclear is online to avoid the building of anymore unsustainable gas-fired plants.

The technical, economic and environmental issues associated with wind power have not been fully explored. Let’s hope the Ontario Energy Board will give them due consideration when it reconvenes so that money can be put where it will do Ontario the most long-term good.

Donald Jones is a professional engineer, now retired after 35 years of CANDU system design.

Comments on this story are moderated

From the Toronto Star
Liberals MPP’s
saggelonitis.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
lalbanese.mpp@liberal.ola.org
warthurs.mpp@liberal.ola.org
warthurs.mpp@liberal.ola.org
bbalkissoon.mpp@liberal.ola.org
rbartolucci.mpp@liberal.ola.org
cbentley.mpp@liberal.ola.org
lberardinetti.mpp@liberal.ola.org
mbest.mpp@liberal.ola.org
jbradley.mpp@liberal.ola.org
lbroten.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
mbrown.mpp.co@liberal.ola.orgjbrownell.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
mbryant.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
dcansfield.mpp@liberal.ola.org
dcaplan.mpp@liberal.ola.org
acarroll.mpp@liberal.ola.org
mchan.mpp@liberal.ola.org
mcolle.mpp@liberal.ola.org
kcraitor.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
bcrozier.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
bdelaney.mpp@liberal.ola.org
vdhillon.mpp@liberal.ola.org
jdickson.mpp@liberal.ola.org
ldombrowsky.mpp@liberal.ola.org
bduguid.mpp@liberal.ola.org
dduncan.mpp@liberal.ola.org
kflynn.mpp@liberal.ola.org
pfonseca.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
jgerretsen.mpp@liberal.ola.org
mgravelle.mpp@liberal.ola.org
phoy.mpp@liberal.ola.org
hjaczek.mpp@liberal.ola.org
ljeffrey.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
kkular.mpp@liberal.ola.org
mkwinter.mpp@liberal.ola.org
jmlalonde.mpp@liberal.ola.org
jleal.mpp@liberal.ola.org
dlevac.mpp@liberal.ola.org
amangat.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
dmatthews.mpp@liberal.ola.org
bmauro.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
tmcmeekin.mpp@liberal.ola.org
pmcneely.mpp@liberal.ola.org
mmeilleur.mpp@liberal.ola.org
jmilloy.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
cmitchell.mpp@liberal.ola.org
rmoridi.mpp@liberal.ola.org
ynaqvi.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
dorazietti.mpp@liberal.ola.org
lpendergast.mpp@liberal.ola.org
speters.mpp@liberal.ola.org
gphillips.mpp@liberal.ola.org
spupatello.mpp@liberal.ola.org
sqaadri.mpp@liberal.ola.org
kramal.mpp@liberal.ola.org
dramsay.mpp@liberal.ola.org
lrinaldi.mpp@liberal.ola.org
truprecht.mpp@liberal.ola.org
lsandals.mpp@liberal.ola.org
msergio.mpp@liberal.ola.org
msmith.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
gsmitherman.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
gsorbara.mpp@liberal.ola.org
csousa.mpp@liberal.ola.org
htakhar.mpp@liberal.ola.org
mvanbommel.mpp@liberal.ola.org
jwatson.mpp@liberal.ola.org
jwilkinson.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
kwynne.mpp@liberal.ola.org
dzimmer.mpp@liberal.ola.org
Opposition MPP’s
ted.arnott@pc.ola.org,
bob.bailey@pc.ola.org,
toby.barrett@pc.ola.org,
dinovoc-@ndp.on.ca,
garfield.dunlopco@pc.ola.org,
christine.elliott@pc.ola.org,
fgelinas-qp@ndp.on.ca,
hhampton-qp@ndp.on.ca,
ernie.hardeman@pc.ola.org,
randy.hillierco@pc.ola.org,
ahorwath-qp@ndp.on.ca,
tim.hudakco@pc.ola.org,
sylvia.jones@pc.ola.org,
frank.klees@pc.ola.org,
pkormos-qp@ndp.on.ca,
lisa.macleod@pc.ola.org,
rmarchese-co@ndp.on.ca,
gerry.martiniuk@pc.ola.org,
norm.millerco@pc.ola.org,
pmiller-qp@ndp.on.ca,
julia.munro@pc.ola.org,
bill.murdoch@pc.ola.org,
john.otooleco@pc.ola.org,
jerry.ouellette@pc.ola.org,
mprue-qp@ndp.on.ca,
bob.runciman@pc.ola.org,
joyce.savoline@pc.ola.org,
laurie.scott@pc.ola.org,
peter.shurman@pc.ola.org,
norm.sterling@pc.ola.org,
tabunsp-qp@ndp.on.ca,
jim.wilson@pc.ola.org,
elizabeth.witmer@pc.ola.org,
john.yakabuski@pc.ola.org

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

Windmills vs. NIMBYism – Toronto Star -Propagandist For the Wind Industry

October 20, 2008
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 country 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

Canadian Election 2008 – Who Are you Going to Vote For?

September 18, 2008

So – Who you gonna vote for?
What a choice!

The Plan to Disappear Canada


National Post
Canada Green Party leader sorry for not smoking pot
AFP – 18 hours ago
OTTAWA (AFP) — Canada’s Green Party leader Elizabeth May apologized on Wednesday for never having smoked marijuana, as she unveiled her election plank,
Green Party releases platform, includes GST hike National Post


Canada.com
Larsen resigns as NDP candidate
Whistler Question,  Canada – 52 minutes ago
Dana Larsen has resigned as the New Democratic Party candidate in the West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country riding. Whistler – Not wanting the
BC NDP candidate Larsen quits over drug links Canada.com
Coca controversy ousts NDP candidate Globe and Mail
Stoner’s NDP bid up in smoke Winnipeg Sun


CTV.ca
Grits call on ‘stars’ to boost struggling Dion
Calgary Herald,  Canada – 5 hours ago
The rollout continues today when MP Michael Ignatieff, once considered the party’s crowned prince, takes to the stage to rescue Liberal Leader Stephane Dion
A big-team approach may turn the game around for Dion Globe and Mail
Stephane Dion to Bob Rae: No more help please; it’s killing me National Post


Canoe.ca
All eyes on Harper as Tories wrestle with Ritz listeriosis controversy
The Canadian Press, OTTAWA – 45 minutes ago
OTTAWA — The Liberals and the NDP clamoured for Gerry Ritz’s ouster Thursday as the campaign trail braced for Stephen Harper’s reaction to the public-health
Harper under pressure to apologize over minister’s listeriosis jokes CBC.ca
Harper says he’d protect Quebec’s on-air identity Globe and Mail
Ritz sorry for ‘tasteless’ Listeria comments CTV.ca

Climate change czar aims to paint province green

March 7, 2008
Editor

Welcome to the Old East Block.
Health care sucks in Ont. McGunity can’t figure it out
Education Sucks in Ont. McGunity can’t figure it out
Agriculture Sucks in Ont. McGunity can’t figure it out

But

This DUMB F@#K thinks he and his communist rabble can control the climate.
If this doesn’t wake up the fluoride drinking brain dead masses nothing will.

As went the Jews so do we follow: with nary a whimper

Please do not take my reference to the Jews in a negative light.
The fact is, they did not fight and neither do we.

Hitler would be proud

McGuitny – Bring on your Czar

 

March 29 I will have ever light on in my house. I might just go buy more and turn them on as well.

I have always had the greatest respect for the environment but this has nothing with the environment. This has to do with you giving up your rights as human beings.

Join me on the 29th. Protest this bullshit by turning on, not off, your lights. Send a message to McGuinty and his Czar.

The
GLOBAL GREEN AGENDA

Climate change czar aims to paint province green

Earth Hour initiative will see ‘guerrilla outfit’ set up to ensure Ontario government keeps its promises

Mar 07, 2008 04:30 AM


Queen’s Park Bureau
Premier Dalton McGuinty has appointed a climate change czar to lead Ontario’s fight against global warming.

Toronto Star Home paper of the CLIMATE CZAR

Ontario Great Lakes wind power

January 15, 2008
Editor:
Letter I sent to Tyler Hamilton who wrote the article below
Tyler
I just read your piece in the Star.
Helimax is a member of CanWEA, they both have a vested interest in wind farm development. It would be reasonable to expect a qualifier in the story.
When people read “could generate up to 47,000 megawatts of clean electricity” they are unfortunately under the impression 47,000 MW will be produced, even though it is very improbable they will ever produce this amount. There is no mention of the natural gas plants that will have to be constructed in order to provide power when the wind is not blowing at capacity, which is most of the time.
The entire renewable energy program set out by the Ont. govt. is based almost entirely on assumptions and possibilities, not on sound engineering practices. It is also a product of Maurice Strong and the e8. In fact the entire Ont generation system is being orchestrated by the guidelines set out by the e8. Marie LeGrow, who is the head project coordinator for wind farms, at the Ministry of the Environment, wrote the manual for the e7 before it became the e8
This story should have been a press release from the govt and the wind industry. When you attach your name you legitimize the fraud that is being perpetrated on the people of Ont. That is unfortunate.
Please read what McGuinty has to say about wind,solar and natural gas.
premier-dalton-mcguinty-talks-about-renewable-energy

Thank you for your time
Ron Stephens
Editor
Blowing Our Tax Dollars on Wind Farms
Ontario to approve Great Lakes wind power

 

DAVID COOPER/TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO
Melancthon wind farm west of village of Shelburne, Ont.

Email Story document.write(‘Email story’); Email story

Email the author Email the author

Several offshore projects are waiting in the wings

Jan 15, 2008 04:30 AM


Energy Reporter
Ontario is preparing to lift a controversial moratorium on the development of offshore wind projects in the Great Lakes that has been in place for nearly 14 months, the Toronto Star has learned.

A Ministry of Natural Resources official says the department is “getting ready” to make an announcement and that new minister Donna Cansfield is “anxious to demonstrate leadership in the area.”

Jamie Rilett, a spokesperson in Cansfield’s office, confirmed that the ministry is currently revisiting the moratorium. He said a decision would be made “shortly.”

Industry sources also confirmed the moratorium’s end is imminent.

Offshore wind energy, while typically associated with ocean projects, offers significant opportunities in the Great Lakes. According to one study by Helimax Energy Inc., the strong and consistent winds typically over the lakes could generate up to 47,000 megawatts of clean electricity – nearly double Ontario’s existing power capacity.

The ministry put a halt to all offshore development in November 2006 to give the government more time to study the potential environmental impact of such projects on bats, butterflies, aquatic species and bird migration routes.

But the moratorium caught some wind developers off guard, particularly those trying to raise money for their proposed projects.

The wisdom of halting development was also called into question when it was discovered that some U.S. states, such as Ohio, were actively moving forward with offshore projects in Lake Erie despite the Ontario policy.

The moratorium followed a protest against an offshore wind project near Leamington, Ont., in September 2006. Nearly 300 residents showed up to a council meeting to protest a 119-turbine project planned by developer Southpoint Wind Power. Council unanimously rejected Southpoint’s proposal and urged the ministry to come up with guidelines that would help small communities evaluate offshore projects.

“There were a number of serious concerns,” said deputy mayor Robert Schmidt, explaining that many residents saw negative impacts on lake navigation, bird and butterfly migration, recreational boating and fishing.

“The biggest issue to most residents was how it affected their view of the lake, which is really only the last natural view we have in our area.”

Schmidt said a number of offshore proposals still wait in the wings.

“The majority of people aren’t against the idea, as long as it’s located in an area where it doesn’t cause problems.”

Energy consultant Paul Bradley, manager of PJB Energy Solutions and former vice-president of generation at the Ontario Power Authority, said offshore projects hold great potential but are also a huge technical challenge.

“They’re all-or-nothing projects,” he said. “You’ve got to collect all that power from each turbine, aggregate it, and then bring it in efficiently through an underwater cable.”

The best wind resources tend to be far from where power is consumed.

One of the biggest challenges is to bring wind-generated energy to communities in southern Ontario without breaking the bank on building high voltage transmission lines, which cost about $3 million a kilometre to construct.

Toronto Hydro Corp. has considered an offshore wind project in Lake Ontario near the Scarborough Bluffs. That wind farm would have a capacity of up to 200 megawatts.

“In the general context of developing wind power in the province, (lifting the moratorium) would be a great step forward,” said Joyce McLean, chair of the Canadian Wind Energy Association and Toronto Hydro’s manager of green energy services.

A more ambitious project by Trillium Power Energy Corp. would involve 140 turbines erected along a shallow stretch of Lake Ontario, about 15 kilometres offshore from Prince Edward County. The wind farm would have a capacity of 710 megawatts, the largest in Ontario.

Wind energy is a major part of the McGuinty government’s plan to double by 2025 the amount of electricity that comes from renewable resources.

The Ministry of Energy announced last August it had directed the Ontario Power Authority to procure another 2,000 megawatts of renewable power, a large portion of which is expected to be generated from wind.

Toronto Star

Premier, Dalton McGuinty Talks About Renewable Energy For Ontario

January 14, 2008

Editor:
I would like to thank Lynne, for sending me the Hansard below. Just what is Premier, Dalton McGuinty up to.

pinn_mcguintyhr370.jpgAccording to our Premier, Dalton McGuinty
Ontario Hansard – 19-April2006
“I think the member opposite knows that when it comes to natural gas, prices there tend to be volatile, and it remains a significant contributor to global warming. Wind turbines: We are investing heavily in those, but again, those are an expensive form of electricity and they’re not reliable, because sometimes obviously the wind does not blow. When it comes to solar, those tend to be expensive as well.”

So Mr. Premiere, instead of building a cost effective reliable electrical system for Ont., you have decided to do the exact opposite. Why?

You say, “natural gas, prices there tend to be volatile, and it remains a significant contributor to global warming”.

Building thousands of megawatts of gas plants, will result in a significant, unnecessary cost, with little or no benefit to the environment. Installing the scrubbers on the coal plants would have brought down the emissions very close to that of the, to be built gas plants, at a fraction of the cost. In fact, by not installing the scrubbers on the coal plants you have put the health of the people of Ont. at risk.

You go on to say
Ontario Hansard – 19-April2006
“But we’re not just sitting on our hands as we weigh these important issues before us. Let me tell you about some of the exciting news that we have by way of creating new wind farms in Ontario. We’ve announced three new wind farms in the last month alone. At Erie Shores, there’s a new wind farm with 66 turbines producing 99 megawatts of power for 25,000 homes. The first phase of a new wind farm outside Goderich is now up. That’s 22 turbines producing enough power for 12,000 homes. And the first phase of a new wind farm is now up outside Shelburne, Ontario: 45 turbines producing 67.5 megawatts. That’s enough to power 18,000 homes”.

Your statement above sounds good, but it’s not exactly honest. According to the Independent Electricity System Operator — “For capacity planning purposes, wind generation has a dependable capacity contribution of 10% of the listed figures.”
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO
Monday 10 April 2006

According to you, the wind farms listed above, produce enough energy to power 55,000 homes, but the IESO says they have a real capacity to power only 5,500 homes.

How long would a auto company get away with advertising “our car gets 60 mpg”, when in reality it only gets 6 mpg. Not long. So why is the govt. allowed to misrepresent in such an overt manner?
You call wind energy, “expensive and not reliable”. Why are you building them?

A new report predicts that energy costs could rise as much as 70 per cent if natural gas generation replaces the four coal plants. But McGuinty said that’s the cost of cleaner air.

“The single greatest contributor to greenhouse gases in the province of Ontario is coal-fired generation so we’re going to do something about that,” he said.

You also said, “natural gas, prices there tend to be volatile, and it remains a significant contributor to global warming”

I had the opportunity to talk with one of your energy advisors about a year ago. He says that the gas plants are more dangerous to health than coal plants with scrubbers installed. Apparently the particulate from the gas plants is much finer and harder for the body to deal with. I was also told gas plants are great emitters of ground level ozone, which is very hard on people with asthma or other breathing problems.

Our manufacturers in Ont. are losing jobs because of the high dollar, while at the same time, Mr. McGuinty, you are doing everything in your power to drive up the cost of electricity. Any significant rise in the cost of power will drive industry out of Ont., and they won’t likely return.

Mr. McGuinty, you recently went to Ottawa looking for Federal Govt. aid to help the manufacturing sector in Ont., while at the same time you are building an electrical system that is sure to drive industry out of the Province or into bankruptcy.

Who are you working for anyway? The people of Ont. or the Maurice Strong agenda. So far, it looks like Strong has your attention. You are obviously not listening to your own energy advisors.

Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the
industrialized civilizations collapse?
Isn’t it our responsiblity to bring that about
?”
Maurice Strong, former Secretary General of UNEP

Further reading material

T h e E 8 r e c o mm e n d a t i o n s

green-agrenda-quotes

Mr. McGuinty, you already know the devastating affect your “Green” polices are having on people and their property values, and you seem convinced, by your own words, that your energy polices are badly flawed, “expensive and unreliable”.

Yet, you continue down this path of destruction for the Ont. economy. Why?