Posts Tagged ‘wind farm’

A Fight Against Windmills In Denmark

February 18, 2008

Editor:
Wind farms are quiet and cause no problems. That’s what we were told. Yet, in Denmark  people don’t want wind turbines near them because of noise, flicker and other problems. Both the industry and the govt. continue to ignore any and all of the problems associated with the wind industry. Why?

Property values do go down once a wind farm is built near homes.

That’s a fact.  

Local politics could short-circuit a national plan to concentrate wind turbines in the country’s windiest areas

Local councils in the country’s 28 windiest towns are digging in their heels against a national plan that would cluster the next generation of high-efficiency wind turbines within their borders, Politiken newspaper reports.

In order to meet its goal of doubling wind power capacity by 2025 as inexpensively as possible, the government will need to place 90 percent of an estimated 1000 land-based windmills, each standing up to 150m, in the windiest areas.

Facing the prospect of asking their residents to accept an average of 35 giant wind turbines, local councillors are already warning national politicians that they are preparing to put up a fight.

‘I think that the 60,000 people that live here in our town would head straight to Copenhagen to protest,’ said John Christensen, chairman of the planning board of the Frederikshavn council in windy northern Jutland.

A number of other councils have already rejected plans to begin building new land-based turbines, many out of concern about problems related to noise and shadows created by the giant turbines.

‘There aren’t a lot of politicians out there saying, “We just have to have this, and we’re willing to risk our seats for it,” ‘ said Søren Hermansen, head of the Energy Academy on the island of Samsø, which this year marks 10 years of energy independence. ‘They don’t dare. If they force windmill projects on their constituents, they won’t be re-elected.’

Two other models for building new windmills, such as offshore windparks and an even distribution throughout the entire country have been looked at by the national Planning Committee for Land-based Wind Turbines.

Both, however, were found to be less cost-effective than concentrating new windmills in the windiest regions.

Source 

Wind turbine noise

February 7, 2008

A short video

Our Life is Hell

Pushing against the wind

February 3, 2008

Editor:
Same crap different country.
The IESO in Ontario states that for planning purposes wind should only be counted on for 10% of it’s capacity rating. So, 1,000MW of wind is equivalent to 100MW of conventional power. The Govt., Media, and the Wind Industry continue to refer to the number of homes powered by wind, based on full capacity not the reality of 10%. At 7am today the 472MWs of wind power in Ont. were pumping out 18MWs, which is 3.82% of their plated capacity. 300 hones powered per MW for 18MW is 5400 homes. The govt. wind industry and the media would like you to believe that 141,600 are being powered by wind.

They should all be charged for false advertising. If they are not being truthful about the real capacity of wind, what else are they not telling us about our electrical system.

How does Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ont., feel about wind energy?

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.”

Pushing against the wind

The wind rush is on. Plans to erect sweeping wind farms are being unfurled at a rate of knots. But is this really clean green energy, or just another case of greedy corporates trashing our landscapes for profit? Anton Oliver argues it’s about time New Zealanders woke up to the dark side of wind power.

Forests of turbines spinning on distant hills: in these carbon-aware times, the glory of wind farms is being touted as the one-stop solution to all our energy ills. So aggressive has been the rush to build them that a week doesn’t seem to go by without a new application for an industrial-scale turbine site going before a local council for consideration under the Resource Management Act (RMA), with a mad green fervour.

You’d be forgiven, then, if it escaped your notice that wind power was part of the problem, not the solution, when the Electricity Commission last week announced that we’re teetering on the brink of yet another major electricity shortage.

The emergency button that is Whirinaki’s diesel-burning power plant (the official national standby) had been pushed, initiated by high wholesale electricity prices thanks to equipment failure at Taranaki’s combined-cycle plant, high water temperatures in the Waikato River forcing Huntly’s coal-burning plant to trim back production and becalmed summer skies over Manawatu meaning its plethora of wind turbines were as useful as wet paper toothpicks.

It may also have escaped your attention that as we rush to cover the country in wind farms (more precisely, as the energy oligarchs rush to gather the armfuls of carbon credits being dangled before them by government as a green bribe), in Europe far greater scrutiny is being applied to the imposition of these vast energy factories upon the environment.

Last week it was leaked that plans for the largest land-based wind farm in Britain, a 181-turbine development in the Scottish Hebrides, are to be vetoed by Scottish ministers due to likely negative impacts on wild birdlife. Likewise, a 27-turbine project in the rolling uplands of Cumbria, England an area with similar tourism and landscape values to Central Otago was deemed “a step too far” in the quest for green energy.

You won’t have read about it here because it’s not in the interests of this country’s major power players to tell you. The Labour-led government has its blinkers on trying to make up for its gross miscalculation of our Kyoto obligations come 2012 (which, rather than deliver us a profit as Labour initially declared, will, according to Business New Zealand projections, cost us as much as $3 billion), frantically searching for alternative revenue streams hence its renewed interest in carbon credits and emissions trading to pay for its incompetence.

Based on the evidence so far, its stated energy and climate change policy to be 90% renewable in our energy generation by the year 2025 should not be seen as green or carbon friendly, but a state-directed, revenue-motivated assault on New Zealand’s natural environment.

The least the government should have done is to come up with a sensible, national, overarching strategy for wind energy generation in New Zealand: instead energy generators including the government’s own SOE, Meridian Energy have seized upon the lack of guidelines in a frantic wind rush for the most cost-effective sites.

Hang on, isn’t the RMA supposed to safeguard us from the excesses of corporate developers?

While the RMA is touted as being a democratic process, the reality is that the success of an appellant’s case comes down to how much money they can raise; since most don’t have a spare $100,000-$500,000 in their coffers to pay a QC and their support staff.

An opponent as financially rotund as Meridian, meanwhile, has a team of lawyers and expensive experts and can afford a cartel of QCs to browbeat local councillors and other beleaguered individuals seriously out of their depth who tend to make up resource consent hearing panels.

Last week, the Crown, via the Ministry for the Environment, made a whole-of-government submission supporting Project Hayes (Meridian’s controversial 176 turbines, proposed for Central Otago, which is headed for the Environment Court).

It cited wind generation as being of national interest since it “ensures” security of energy supply by providing additional generation capacity and diversification of electricity production methods and, secondly, supposedly helps New Zealand address climate change issues.

Yet no one is asking the hard questions of a government desperate to sell itself to an increasingly green-aware public in election year.

As the fine print of the Energy Commission release indicated, wind energy is not reliable. No one knows when it will blow. At best, crude statistics are used to predict how much it will blow on average over very long time frames (months, years). Wind generation cannot be calculated with any security: will it blow tomorrow morning, Friday evening or next Wednesday at 6pm when Huntly’s going to be offline or the hydro lakes are low?

New Zealanders are sold on the concept that all wind is green, therefore large-scale wind is the panacea for all our woes. But wind farms like Project Hayes are attractive to the generator oligarchy only because of economics of scale and carbon credits: together they make industrial-sized wind not only financially viable, but exceedingly profitable.

Basing security of supply, meanwhile, on something that is as inherently unpredictable is somewhere south of foolish. Overseas experience has already shown that for every 1000 megawatts of wind generation installed less than 10% can be calculated as firm generating capacity, therefore increasing rather than decreasing traditional energy supply (often carbon-emitting) because of the fundamental problem: when the wind stops blowing, where does the power come from?

Meridian and other generators continue to regurgitate their standard spiel that this or that wind farm is “capable of producing enough electricity to power 100,000 homes”. Try supplying Wellington’s Courtenay Pl, Lambton Quay, the Beehive and ancillary government buildings with wind power only for a year and in December ask them how they got on.

Wind surges also cause massive voltage and frequency increases, threatening the integrity and stability of the grid (which, under Cook Strait, even last week had to be held at a paltry 400MW to stop the system from overloading). Of course, sudden decreases in wind have to be replaced by alternative, ready-to-go energy standbys such as Whirinaki. Not the kind of admission we tend to hear from energycoms as they try to push their wind schemes on to an unsuspecting public.

Leaving aside the belief that it will have unacceptable environmental and tourism impacts on an iconic slice of Otago, Meridian’s Project Hayes wind farm has yet to disclose any alternative methods for generating electricity when it isn’t blowing, nor how the grid will handle the load placed on it, nor even some basic science collected from the site to back up their claims that this is a good thing for the country as a whole.

Peak Oil New Zealand

Wind turbines in Union Township would need to be at least one-half mile from homes

February 1, 2008

 Watch the video

— Regulations being considered for wind turbines in Union Township would make a proposed wind energy project in the township impossible, the wind developer said this morning.

Wind turbines in Union Township would need to be at least one-half mile from homes and 1,000 feet from property lines, according to a proposed wind ordinance presented to the Town of Union Plan Commission on Thursday night.

The town’s Wind Turbine Study Committee was charged with investigating wind turbines and writing a proposed ordinance to regulate them.

Curt Bjurlin, Wisconsin project developer for EcoEnergy, said he is disappointed with the draft ordinance because he said it is “far more restrictive” than the state’s model draft ordinance.

“I think the town leadership realizes the people in the town and surrounding area greatly desire the need to have renewable energy,” he said.

The proposed setbacks leave “very, very little land” available, he said, “and certainly not enough for a renewable energy project.”

Bjurlin said EcoEnergy staff will work with town officials and residents to answer questions.

“We’re dedicated to building this project and moving forward,” he said.

The recommended setbacks are the absolute minimum, committee chairman Tom Alisankus stressed, because the committee’s research suggested distances of up to 12 miles.

The town board appointed the seven-member committee in September, and it has met nearly every Saturday since. The town board imposed a stay on construction of large wind energy systems until August.

EcoEnergy is proposing to put three 397-foot tall wind turbines in the township. Wisconsin Public Power would buy the energy to be used by Evansville Water and Light customers.

A town attorney will review the committee’s recommendations, and the plan commission will discuss the ordinance at its Thursday, Feb. 28, meeting and likely hold a public hearing at its March 27 meeting.

Committee members worked hundreds of hours, and committee member Jim Bembinster visited wind farms as far away as Wasco, Ore., Alisankus said. The committee’s results are summarized in a 318-page report, along with a 25-page draft ordinance.

Members looked through thousands of pages of documents and only considered information that was peer-reviewed or cited by reputable sources, Alisankus said. Doing so eliminated any influence from members’ personal feelings, he said.

Committee members started with the state’s model draft ordinance, which Alisankus said left a sour taste in their mouths. They sent an open records request seeking the scientific and medical documentation used to develop the state’s model ordinance, which has an “aura” of state approval, he said.

“The committee was shocked to receive a response to this open records request that in fact there was no scientific or medical documentation used to create the model draft ordinance,” he said.

Instead, the state sent them 11 pages, most of which were notes from meetings used to write the ordinance. It appeared the ordinance was written predominantly by a Florida power company, Alisankus said.

In Ontario it appears rules governing wind farms were written predominantly by CanWEA (added by blog editor)

The committee also invited stakeholders to participate and sent lists of questions to the companies involved.

“We were not particularly pleased with the responses we got,” Alisankus said. “In one case, even though there were scores of questions, we only received five answers back.”

Setbacks and sound were key to the committee’s work, he said.

“If you control … the setbacks and the sound levels appropriately, there should be no issue with ultimate construction of these turbines, at least with respect to the health and safety boundaries that we had to live by,” he said.

The state’s model ordinance makes the “assumption” that a 1,000-foot setback is OK, Alisankus said.

EcoEnergy plans its projects to have at least a 1,150-foot setback, Bjurlin said.

But the majority of the scientific and medical documentation the committee found recommended a minimum of one-half mile from homes, Alisankus said.

Their research came from the World Health Organization, audiologists, physicists, acoustical engineers, doctors and residents, he said.

“The whole problem area that a lot of people have been focusing a lot of time on can be solved by proper siting and proper testing ahead of time,” he said. “If the community does that and if the wind industry goes along with that, there shouldn’t be too many issues left over beyond that.”

WIND COMMITTEE

Members of the Town of Union Wind Study Committee are Tom Alisankus, chairman; Renee Exum, secretary; Scott McElroy, Jim and Cathy Bembinster, Mike Leeder and Sue Pestor.

ORDINANCE HIGHLIGHTS

Under the Town of Union Wind Study Committee’s recommended draft ordinance:

— Wind turbines must be sited at least one-half mile from the nearest home, business, school, daycare facility, church, hospital and other inhabited structures.

— Turbines must be sited at least 1,000 feet from the nearest property line and at least five times the rotor diameter from the property lines of all adjoining property owners who have not granted an easement for a lesser setback.

— Turbines must be sited at least 1,000 feet or three times its total height from any road, railroad, power line right-of-way and above-ground public electric power line or telephone line.

— Applications for a wind energy system must include—in part—a pre-construction noise survey within a 1-mile radius of each proposed turbine location, a sound study, an environmental study, ice and blade throw calculations plans, a shadow flicker and blade glint map, a stray voltage and ambient voltage test/plan and a fire prevention, emergency response and rescue plan.

— Limits would be placed on the sound produced by turbines as measured from the outside of the nearest residence and other inhabited structures.

REGULATION LIMITS

Wind turbine ordinances can only regulate turbines in regard to public health and safety, said Tom Alisankus, chairman of the Town of Union Wind Study Committee.

Alisankus said the committee could not address:

— Necessity of a meteorological tower to gather data in a proposed site

— Impact on farmland

— Divisiveness in communities

— Impact on property values

— Decommissioning of turbines

— Other alternative energy sources

Watch the video

Gazette Xtra

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

Gaia is Pagan – Global Warming is a Scam

January 5, 2008

Editor:
Is Dion a pagan? Does he know global warming is phony? I’m thinking, build a big prison on an iceberg and all these lunatics can spend the rest of their lives measuring the depth of the ice. Time to clean up govt. Your Country depends on it.

No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.
Christine Stewart,
fmr Canadian Minister of the Environment

Letter
By Christine Stewart

Dear Editor I am writing with reference to an article that appeared on the Gazette’s website entitled ‘Devil worship fears as goat is found in ditch’. The first line of the narrative on the website suggested that this was a ‘pagan-style’ ritual. As a Pagan myself, I was appalled that this dreadful attack might be associated with members of the Pagan community. There are many misconceptions as to what pagans are about and I would like through the medium of your newspaper to enlighten your readers and allay any fears they may have about what paganism is about.

In the simplest terms, Paganism is a religion of place, or a native religion, for example the Native American’s religion is Pagan, Hinduism is a form of Paganism. All Pagan religions are characterised by a connection and reverence for nature, and are usually polytheistic i.e. have many gods and/or goddesses. Paganism in the west takes a number of forms including Wicca, Druidism, and Shamanism.

Pagans revere nature. Often you will find Pagans at the forefront of environmental concerns, such is our love of Mother Earth. Paganism is not just a nature religion but a natural religion, which is as old as mankind and its traditions are still being rediscovered. Pagans see the divine as immanent in the whole of life and the universe in every tree, plant, animal and object, man and woman and in the dark side of life as much as in the light. Pagans live their lives attuned to the cycles of nature, the seasons, life and death. Pagans regard the divine as female as well as male and therefore there is a Goddess as well as a God. The Goddess represents all that is female and the God represents all that is male. But because nature is seen as female, the Goddess has a wider meaning. Often called Mother Earth, or Gaia, she is seen as the ‘Creatrix’ and sustainer of life, the mother of us all, which makes all the creatures on the planet our siblings. The taking of a creature and its subsequent torture and killing is therefore totally abhorrent to us.

advertisement

Historically, many pagan cultures did kill animals as offerings to their gods, as many cultures still do, but the meat from the animal would be used in a celebratory meal rather than left to rot and wasted. Modern pagans are likely to seek out organic meat for their own celebratory meals, or will often be vegetarian. They are extremely unlikely to be involved in a hack and slash killing of an animal.

Western Pagans have no fixed temples in which to worship (apart from Hindus), but instead we (usually) make a circle around themselves (or form ourselves into a circle) in a room, or in a clearing, or on a beach, or find a naturally occurring circle, such as a grove, or use one of the ancient stone circles. Pagans have no hierarchy like the established religions, so Pagans are free to follow whatever spiritual path they choose. We have our own values and ethics and believe we are responsible for our own actions. There is no absolution as such, what we do to others will come back on us and we are therefore ever mindful of the effect our actions have on others, including animals The Pagan view of the universe is one of complementary opposites – light/dark, yin/yang, earth/sky, male/female; the concept of Lucifer, the fallen angel, (The Devil), was adopted by the church in 447. Consequently it is impossible for Pagans to adopt the concept of the Devil, which is a Judeo-Christian concept. Hence the reason so called ‘Devil Worship’ could never be a part of our beliefs.

Pagans come from all walks of life. We count among our number manual workers, teachers, nurses, civil servants, journalists, solicitors, secretaries, web designers, mothers, fathers and grandparents too. In short, we are just people just like you.

Christine Stewart

OPTIONS FOR COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS IN ONTARIO

January 11, 2007

This paper was written in 2004.
It looks at all options for replacement of coal. This 31 page document shows how wrong the Liberal govt. is when it comes to electrical generation in Ontario. If you really want high prices and an unstable grid then embrace the wind. If you want a cost effective reliable grid then get active. I thank Mr. Rogers for his work and allowing me to share it with you.

J.T.ROGERS, PhD
Professor-Emeritus
Dept. of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
Carleton University
Ottawa, Ontario

The low intensity of wind power results in a requirement for many large wind turbines to generate any significant power. Furthermore, these turbines have to be well-spaced to ensure
that wake effects on adjacent turbines do not reduce blade efficiency, and thus power generation, significantly. Based on data from different sources, the power-to-area intensity for
wind farms varies from about 2.8 MW/km2 to about 5.0 MW/km2 [32, 33, 34]. Therefore, to replace the capacity of the OPG coal plants by wind power plants, assuming an optimistic
power intensity of 4 MW/km2, would require a total area of about 1,900 sq.km., about three times the size of metropolitan Toronto. The cost and difficulty of assembling adequate wind
sites over such an area in southern Ontario would be prohibitive, even though some of the required area would also still be usable for agricultural purposes. In addition, the total electricity produced annually by this capacity would be considerably less than that produced by the coal-fired plants because of the low annual capacity factors of the wind plants. From the above data on the current installed capacity and energy production of wind power plants in Ontario, the annual capacity factor of these plants is 18.7%, compared to about 60% to 65% for
the coal-fired plants. An ACF of 18.7% is on the low side of the range of ACFs for existing
wind farms, 20% to 30% [35]. Assuming an average ACF of 25%, replacing the coal-fired plants by the same capacity of wind-fired plants would result in the generation of only about
40% of the electricity produced in a year by the coal-fired plants. Furthermore, unlike power from the coal-fired plants, power from the wind plants would not be available on demand to
meet varying loads, but would depend on the variability of the wind. Since there is no practical means of storing electricity directly on a large scale, building additional wind plants to
overcome this intermittency would not be helpful12.
In effect, wind plants cannot really replace the coal-fired plants, since they cannot meet the requirements of intermediate-load service, that is, being available on demand to meet varying
loads over a day or other period. Similarly, wind plants cannot be used for base-load to provide continuous power or for peaking plants to provide peak power on demand. Wind generation is
only useful for now as displacement energy, being accepted by the grid, when it is available, in preference to energy from conventional plants whose operating costs at that time are greater
than those of the wind energy plants .

It is concluded that wind energy is not a realistic option to replace the coal-fired plants and will continue to play only a very minor role in electricity generation in Ontario.

For the full text of his paper

http://www.cns-snc.ca/media/CNS_Position_Papers/Ontario_coal.pdf