Category Archives: Renewable energy

Ottawa councillor wants municipal say on wind power contracts

05 Thursday May 2016

Posted by in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Municipal input should be a deciding factor in granting wind power contracts, Councillor Scott Moffatt says

3-MW turbine south of Ottawa at Brinston: Ontario. Communities have had no choice. [Photo by Ray Pilon, Ottawa]

3-MW turbine south of Ottawa at Brinston: Ontario. Communities have had no choice. [Photo by Ray Pilon, Ottawa]

CFRA, May 5, 2016

Rideau-Goulbourn councillor Scott Moffatt wants the City to be able to have a say on where future wind turbines are placed.

He’s tabling a report at Thursday’s Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee meeting, recommending Council ask the Province of Ontario to change the law, to give municipalities “a substantive and meaningful role” in deciding where future wind power projects will go.

The report says municipalities deserve a role in the process, because “the siting of wind power projects has local planning implications” and decisions on renewable energy projects need to take place “within the context of community sustainability.”

The report further states that early municipal input should not only be a priority for proponents of new wind projects, but it should also be a deciding factor for Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) when approving a new project.

Currently, the Province has sole jurisdiction over where wind farms are located.

If the recommendation is approved, full City Council will vote on whether to send their concerns to the Provincial government, the energy minister, the IESO, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, and all municipalities in Ontario.

The Agenda for the ARAC meeting May 5 is here.

 

EDITOR’S NOTE: The community of North Gower presented a petition to  Ottawa City Council in 2013 asking for recognition as an “unwilling host” to a proposed wind power project that would have been close to thousands of residents. Council passed a motion unanimously asking the Government of Ontario to return local land-use planning power to municipalities. The government gave no response to Ottawa, Ontario’s second largest city.

At present, more than 90 communities in Ontario are officially “unwilling hosts” to wind power projects–that represents the majority of Ontario communities vulnerable to the industrial-scale power projects.

North Stormont wind farm fight: no democracy, no truth, citizens say

03 Tuesday May 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

If province had a 1-km setback for wind power generators, almost none of the North Stormont project would be allowable, says community group. “They say wind power is ‘green’ ” says leader Margaret Benke, “but it’s not.”

<p>Margaret Benke surrounded by research into wind turbines on Monday April 25, 2016 in Berwick, Ont. Benke is hoping North Stormont Council will pass a resolution urging the IESO to rate an unwilling municipality as a mandatory requirement as opposed to rated criteria.</p><p> Lois Ann Baker/Cornwall Standard-Freeholder/Postmedia Network

Margaret Benke: asking North Stormont Council to pass resolution May 10, making municipal support a mandatory requirement for wind power contracts [Photo: Cornwall Standard-Freeholder]

Cornwall Standard-Freeholder, May 2, 2016

BERWICK – She is fighting the good fight and not about to quit just yet.

Margaret Benke is chair of the Concerned Citizens of North Stormont and she and her group are hoping to stop the wind turbines from coming to the township.

Benke said the first time she heard about the turbines coming was when she read about a public meeting in the Chesterville Record.

“I said I’ve got to do something,” said Benke.

Earlier this year, EDP Renewables was awarded a contract for its proposed Nation Rise Wind Farm under the Independent Electricity System Operator’s large renewable procurement process. The project is rated at a potential 100,000 megawatts. On its website, EDP says it has secured contracts with about 40 local landowners covering over 4,000 hectares (10,000 acres).

Benke related a story of her nephew who had purchased his first home in Shelburne and within a year or two wind turbines went up around his land.

“He couldn’t live in his house anymore,” she said. “He abandoned his house. He likened (the noise) to living inside a drum.”

Benke said she had been hearing the stories at family get-togethers about issues with wind turbines.

This spurred Benke into action. Together with a family friend who happens to be a cartographer, they put together a map of the area and, allowing for the mandatory 550-metre setback for wind turbines, were able to determine approximately where the turbines could be erected.

She also looked into the Health Canada study done on wind turbines and found out of the 2,004 people originally selected for the study, 430 had abandoned or demolished their houses due to the turbines.

“It significantly decreased the number of people in the study,” she said. She said they interviewed people who were 550 metres away from turbines, but the only people who were that close were the landowners who were under contract with the wind turbine companies.

Benke then asked to be a delegation at a council meeting so she could present council with the information she researched on the wind turbines before council made any decision on whether to support the turbines or not.

“Immediately anybody with money sense, their antenna goes up, there is money in this,” she said. As every municipality is aware, there have been cutbacks into how much money they are receiving from the province, and that money has to come from somewhere.

“We did a very balanced overview of what the map looked like and what it would look like if you had a one-kilometre setback which is what the experts recommend,” she said. “There were only two fields that would have qualified.”

The one-kilometre recommended setback refers to a paper put out by the Ministry of the Environment where it recommended a setback of one kilometre for a wind farm of 10 turbines with noise level of 105 decibels.

Benke also found out each turbine generated just over $4,000, which was about the same amount of tax revenues from a home valued at $300,000 to $350,000.

“If you go ahead with the wind turbines, it pretty much kills any new development,” she said. “I couldn’t let this happen without at least being a voice in the wilderness. We needed to have our voices heard.”

Benke said wind turbines give the illusion they are “green” but they are not.

“It’s the perception that it’s doing something for us that it’s not,” she said. “Lack of democracy, lack of transparency, lack of truthfulness.”

Tom Loturco of EDP Renewables explained the next step is for contracted projects to obtain all necessary licences and approvals, including conducting an environmental assessment. According to the IESO website, these processes must include community engagement.

On behalf of the Concerned Citizens of North Stormont, Benke sent a letter to Mayor Dennis Fife and the councillors asking them to pass a resolution to request the Independent Electricity System Operator make a willing municipality for renewable energy a mandatory requirement as opposed to a rated criteria. Council deferred the passing of the resolution to a later date. North Stormont had already voted to declare itself an unwilling host for the large renewable procurement program.

Benke is asking council not to give up and if something as simple as passing the resolution will help, do it.

In any case, we strive to have good working relationships with landowners, municipalities and the public,” Loturco said. …

Read the full article here.

NoMeansNo_FB

Ontario’s green energy fiasco about to get worse: Globe Editorial

01 Sunday May 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Globe and Mail EDITORIAL, April 29, 2016

Late last year, Ontario’s Auditor-General put out a report detailing the extent of the provincial government’s mismanagement of the electricity system. According to Bonnie Lysyk, thanks to a misguided government policy of artificially pumping up the cost of producing power in the province, Ontarians had overpaid for electricity to the tune of $37-billion between 2006 and 2014, and will continue to be overcharged by another $133-billion by 2032.

The scale of the waste is so large as to be almost incomprehensible, which may explain why Ms. Lysyk’s report was a one-day news wonder when it landed last December. Once the count gets into the hundreds of billions, the mind goes numb. If the province announced construction of the Burning Money Biomass Plant, fuelled by bales of five and 10-dollar bills, it probably wouldn’t be capable of destroying $170-billion.

The size of the disaster in the province’s electricity system is hard to get your head around. But voters, consumers, businesses and especially the Liberal government should be rereading Ms. Lysyk’s report. Because a document leaked to The Globe and Mail this week suggests that the Liberals, who a decade ago broke the electricity system through a fatal combination of good intentions and a willful disregard of both expertise and experience, may be preparing to repeat the exercise with their next greenhouse gas reduction plan.

The thing is, Ontario needs a greenhouse gas reduction strategy. So does every province, and so does the federal government. To meet our international commitments, and to bend the curve on global warming, those carbon-reduction goals have to be ambitious. Ontario’s proposed Climate Change Mitigation and Low Carbon Economy Act aims to reduce the province’s 1990 emissions by 15 per cent by 2020, 37 per cent by 2030 and 80 per cent by 2050. The province is committing itself to substantial carbon reduction in the next decade, and a near-zero carbon economy in a generation.

Those are not impossible ideals. They’re doable – using the right tools. Dramatically reducing carbon emissions is not a crazy idea, but the way Ontario is proposing to get to a low-carbon economy almost certainly is.

Ontario went about it all wrong

A decade ago, the government of Ontario started driving up electricity costs with a simple objective in mind: It wanted to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the production of electricity. This was the right objective. But the way it went about it was all wrong. Instead of encouraging the electricity sector to be as efficient as possible, the government essentially ordered it to become costly, inefficient and irrational. Some of this was motivated by fantasies of industrial policy – look, Ma, we’re subsidizing the Green Jobs Of the Future! – and some of it was driven by an insistence on ignoring basic economic advice, much of it coming from the government’s own experts.

The result is that the cost of generating electricity in Ontario has exploded, even as power costs plummeted elsewhere. Between 2004 and 2014, power generation costs in Ontario increased by 74 per cent, according to the auditor. This benefits no one. The higher prices don’t come from carbon taxes; they come from higher electricity production costs. And that imposes a heavy cost on the economy.

However, because prices were rising, Ontarians started using less energy. Power use dropped by 7 per cent between 2006 and 2014. But at the same time, thanks to subsidies to encourage greater power production from green sources, the province’s generation capacity grew by 19 per cent. As a result, the province is now a major exporter of electricity – sold at prices far below the cost of production. The more power the province exports, the more taxpayers and ratepayers lose.

Ontario could have chosen a different route. Instead of politicians completely remaking the electricity sector on a whim, introducing inefficiencies by deciding what power technologies to back and how much to subsidize them, Ontario could have done the opposite. It could have set a carbon-reduction goal, imposed carbon taxes on carbon-generating fuels – and left it to producers and consumers to figure out how to most efficiently respond by reducing their own costs and emissions. It should have taxed dirty power and let the market figure out the cheapest way to get to lower emissions levels.

More enthusiasm than knowledge

Nearly a decade later, this week’s leaked document on its upcoming greenhouse-gas strategy suggests Kathleen Wynne’s government has not learned from her predecessor Dalton McGuinty’s mistakes. Glen Murray, a minister with more enthusiasm than knowledge, is in charge of the environmental file; last time around, George Smitherman was the designated enthusiast.

Ontarians should be worried. …

Read the full story here

North Stormont to consider mandatory municipal support motion May 10

28 Thursday Apr 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Ordinary citizens not invited: Energy Minister Chiarelli (centre) at recent wind power lobby group event

Ordinary citizens not invited: Energy Minister Chiarelli (centre) at recent wind power lobby group event

Although the Ontario Minister of Energy Bob Chiarelli said it would be “virtually impossible” for a wind power developer to get a contract without municipal support, the recent announcement of new wind power contracts by the Independent Electricity Systems Operator (IESO) showed the opposite: three of the five municipalities where wind power developers were successful in getting contracts were officially “unwilling host” communities.

That included Dutton Dunwich, where the municipality had held a referendum, resulting in a vote of 84 percent of residents opposed to the power project. A U.S.-based power developer got the nod to build a huge, 60-megawatt power project. “We don’t live in the Province of Ontario,” the Mayor said; “we live in the Province of Toronto.”

Now, in spite of a surplus of power in Ontario, and power companies being paid to NOT produce power, the IESO is launching yet another bid process, the LRP II, this time for 600 more megawatts of expensive, intermittent and unneeded wind power.

And municipalities are getting ready: a resolution is circulating that notes statements from the Auditor General about the expense of wind power, the surplus power situation, the fact that there are no real environmental benefits from industrial-scale wind power projects and in fact harm to the natural environment results.

The resolution demands that municipal support be a mandatory requirement in future bids, not just a point-getting option for developers.

To date, 17 municipalities have approved the resolution in a few weeks.

May 10, the resolution comes before North Stormont Council at 6:30 PM in the municipal building in Berwick. Concerned Citizens of North Stormont is asking all affected residents to come and support the resolution—take back local control of development, for more effective community planning.

See more information on the Mandatory Municipal Support Resolution at the Wind Concerns Ontario website, here.

 

Wind power doesn’t work, engineer says. Get something that does

19 Tuesday Apr 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Throwing billions of dollars at wind and solar factories isn’t going to lower greenhouse emissions effectively or efficiently

Jim McPherson, Special to the Sun

First posted: Saturday, April 16, 2016 09:41 PM EDT | Updated: Saturday, April 16, 2016 09:48 PM EDT

(Postmedia Network FILE PHOTO)

Last month, despite continuing objections from hosting municipalities and numerous concerns expressed by the office of the Auditor General of Ontario, Premier Kathleen Wynne’s provincial government approved more renewable energy projects.

Last week, a wind power developer began legally clearing vegetation from a vast area of pristine wildlife in Prince Edward County, even though the Enviromental Review Tribunal (ERT) had ruled the project would cause serious and irreversible harm to endangered Blandings Turtles and Little Brown Bats.

On April 8, photographs of habitat destruction apparently prompted the ERT to order an “interim stay” on construction and a “remedial measures” hearing will now be scheduled.

Federal and provincial Liberal governments are on a “green energy” spending spree. They recklessly tilt at climate change by funding unwanted and unneeded wind and solar projects that kill wildlife and harm humans.

They generate super-expensive, intermittent, electricity that is exported at huge losses.

A comparison to Florida is a sobering story. In the past decade, while Ontario electricity rates nearly doubled, Florida’s rates declined by 10%.

There are no industrial wind farms in Florida, where the electricity utility is owned by the same corporation that destroyed an Ontario eagle’s nest for its wind energy project in that province. Most of Florida is only a few meters above sea level, but wind turbines can’t save Florida from man-made global warming.

The Ontario Society of Professional Engineers reports that, “adding wind and solar to Ontario’s grid drives CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions higher”, because they need backup from carbon-emitting gas plants.

Trudeau’s $10 billion climate change initiatives cannot change that fact.

Our governments have been duped by a global industry that wants our money now; even though there’s no way to store unneeded electricity.

Terrified by the global warming threat, citizens allow our governments to believe that wind energy can save us. But it can’t.

In desperation, Ontario keeps approving “renewable energy“ projects, while our federal government just sends money. Meanwhile the Trudeau Liberals ignore their responsibility to protect human health, endangered species, migrating wildlife and human rights.

Health Canada admits wind turbine noise creates community annoyance that can be harmful to health but refuses to regulate acoustic radiations from wind turbines.

Trudeau’s $10 billion climate change initiatives will not change that.

Ontario’s Auditor-General and municipal governments know “renewable” wind and solar energy is not affordable for taxpayers and ratepayers — we subsidize it through feed-in tariff contracts, federal grants, and now by Trudeau’s budgeted climate change initiatives.

Municipalities fear wind turbines will devastate tourism-dependent economies and devalue tax-generating properties. Trudeau’s $10 billion climate change initiatives cannot change that.

Two years ago, 90 Ontario municipalities declared themselves “not a willing host” for wind turbines.This year, most of them called on the Wynne government not to publicly subsidize any more renewable energy projects.

Municipalities know turbines are not safe for human communities, just as they were not safe for millions of deceased wildlife.

We must reject the foolish fantasy of getting reliable, safe and affordable energy from unreliable, unsafe, and unaffordable wind and solar factories.

Trudeau should not give our money to the provinces for carbon pricing subsidies.

The provinces will waste it on schemes that drive electricity prices still higher, without reducing greenhouse gases.

Instead, Trudeau should challenge industry to develop affordable energy storage by 2020, just as John Kennedy challenged America to land on the moon by the end of his decade.

It would be better to invest $10 billion in the development of energy storage, so that our children might then be able to afford the intermittent energy available from the wind and the sun.

Our first priority must be to make energy storage affordable. Until then, we must stop devastating our wildlife habitat and our rural communities with expensive “green energy” factories that can’t reduce greenhouse gases.

Ontario “worst electricity market in the world”

19 Tuesday Apr 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

While Ottawa’s Bob Chiarelli, Ontario Minister of Energy, insists that paying high and selling low is a good economic strategy (meanwhile inflicting dramatic increases in bills to consumers), economic analysts don’t seem to agree. Here from Forbes. com is a view of Ontario’s handling of the electricity sector.

Ontario’s high electricity prices are bad for business

Jude Clemente, Forbes/Energy, March 30, 2016

“Ontario is probably the worst electricity market in the world,” Pierre-Olivier Pineau, University of Montreal

Ontario’s auditor general just reported that the province paid an extra $37 billion for electricity from 2006-2014, likely the most ludicrous energy story that I’ve ever read (here). Ontario has gone from having some of the most affordable electricity in North America to having some of the most expensive. From 2013-2015 alone, industrial electricity rates increased 16%.

  • The Green Energy Act (GEA) “is costing Ontario over $5 billion annually but yields negligible environmental benefits,“and the plan has been 10 times more costly per year than an alternative coal retrofit plan examined in 2005.
  • The GEA prioritizes wind, even though wind power generation is almost perfectly out-of-sync with consumption in Ontario, resulting in the dumping of surplus wind energy into outside markets. “Electricity exports cost Ontario taxpayers $200 million in June.”
  • In 2003, the provincial government decided to phase-out coal-fired generation by 2007 (later extended to 2014), perhaps the most cost effective source of power.
  • This necessitated investment in new sources of electricity. For example, more expensive wind has provided less than 4% of Ontario’s power but accounts for 20% of the cost of electricity. In January, Ontario Power Generation unveiled plans for a $13 billion refurbishment of four nuclear reactors, which could crush ratepayers to recover the total costs.

Read the full article at Forbes.com here.

Government lawyer derails citizen appeal to protect endangered wildlife

08 Friday Apr 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Ministry of the Environment lawyer steps in as Prince Edward County citizens appealed for a stay of unauthorized construction activities in endangered turtle habitat

Wind Concerns Ontario

Massive clearing of vegetation in Prince Edward County wetland area. This project is still under appeal, but the developer has gone ahead
Massive clearing of vegetation in Prince Edward County wetland area. This project is still under appeal, but the developer has gone ahead [Photo: APPEC]

April 6, 2016, Picton, Ontario —STATEMENT FROM ALLIANCE TO PROTECT PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY (APPEC)

First and foremost our great thanks to everyone who responded to our call to attend the Court of Appeal hearing.  The courtroom was filled to capacity with no seats left empty.  The numbers left an impression on all present from the judge to the security guards who were curious about what case all the commotion was about.  It was a packed courtroom by anyones’ standards and we thank all of you who made this possible.  Our special thanks to Mayor Quaiff and Warren Howard of Wind Concerns Ontario.
However the outcome of today’s hearing is not what we had hoped for.  On our arrival we had hoped that Justice Katherine van Rensburg would hear our appeal and our new evidence including aerial photography of the destruction that has occurred at the White Pines project site since WPD began clearing vegetation two days ago, as depicted in one photograph attached.
Instead Sylvia Davis, lawyer for the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, cited a ruling from over fifty years ago that only a panel of three judges could hear an appeal of this nature.  It became clear at that point that the motion would not be heard until after the legal matter of whether this was properly before the court had been dealt with, with a potentially unfavourable decision. Rather than spend considerable time and money on legal wrangling the decision was made to withdraw our motion for a stay on all physical activity at the White Pines project site.  The motion was withdrawn on consent of all parties and without costs.
We have received the written reasons from the Environmental Review Tribunal for its original refusal of our stay motion.  We will immediately be going to the Tribunal to once again request a stay.  As the saying goes when one door closes, another opens.  More information will follow soon.
Lastly, there is a short article on the Wind Concerns website with another photograph of the after-effects of vegetation clearing at www.windconcernsontario.ca
Regards,
Orville Walsh
President, APPEC
For more information on this project and to donate toward legal fees, please go to www.savethesouthshore.org

Green energy done badly: views from around the world

02 Saturday Apr 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

WEEKEND READING

Wind Concerns Ontario

April 2, 2016

We present a collection of stories that review the manner in which strategies that are supposedly positive for the environment have been enacted (usually without any sort of cost-benefit or full impact analysis), and what the results are to date.

From Terence Corcoran’s review in The Financial Post, to a review of German energy policy (this is a sad, sad story worthy of Dickens), an article in Prince Edward County’s Wellington Times (one of the last independent newspapers in Canada) on a wind power developer’s arrogance, and last, an opinion on what the real effect on the local environment green energy policies are in reality, the collection deserves a read … and consideration by the Ontario government.

Will they? In the words of the team of academics lead by the University of Ottawa’s Stewart Fast, writing recently about the disastrous implementation of the Green Energy Act on Ontario communities, “Our recommendations will unfortunately remain unaddressed, without further consideration or assessment of the lessons that could be learned.” [Fast et al. Lessons learned from Ontario wind energy disputes, January, 2016]

Terence Corcoran, The Financial Post, “Clean, green, and catastrophic.” (Note: our Parker Gallant provided some figures for this article.)

Handelsblatt (Global edition) “How to kill an industry”. (Thanks to energy economist Robert Lyman in Ottawa for sending this in.)

Rick Conroy, The Wellington Times, “There’s always a catch.” (“The wolf has been sent to find out what’s killing all the lambs …” Conroy writes.)

Last, this letter to the editor of Ontario Farmer, excerpted here.

“Off-grid will make a bad situation worse for reluctant grid payees”

A farming friend recently took me on a “crop tour” of rural businesses that are partially or fully off-grid. We saw a sawmill, a pressed-steel manufacturer, a maker of wood-burning stoves, a cabinet-maker and an ethanol plant. Finding it progressively more difficult to remain profitable in the agricultural business with skyrocketing electrical costs, my friend is seriously looking at more cost-effective alternatives. If going off-grid works for others, perhaps it will work for him.

“Off-grid” means that these business owners are no longer victims of usurious hydro rates the Ontario Green Energy Act (GEA) has imposed on the vast majority who obtain electricity from Hydro One and other such utility companies. Are these enterprises trailblazers illuminating a path to greater energy independence for other beleaguered hydro ratepayers?

Or are they creating an even greater financial burden for those who remain on the grid?

And what may be the environmental impact if a great many businesses follow suit?

Operating the Ontario power grid has become exorbitantly expensive under the GEA. It is becoming ever more expensive as greater numbers of windmills spring up to further sully our rural landscapes. … Operating costs of a centralized generation and distribution system are borne by all users. The more users there are, the less share of fixed costs each user pays. Businesses fleeing to off-grid energy alternatives leave fewer users on-grid bearing fixed costs; thus, each user pays more. While going off-grid may financially benefit those who do it, greater economic burden falls on those remaining on-grid, and most have no choice.

Fossil fuels are the primary energy source for off-grid users. Electricity to run their businesses must be generated by some sort of power plant, typically an internal combustion engine driving and electrical generator. It’s far removed from the most cost-effective or environmentally friendly way to generate and distribute electricity —the way we used to do it — but the GEA has made grid power so prohibitively expensive off-grid generation has become economically viable for major energy users.

Dave Plumb

Belmont, Ontario

Crusading mayor says he is game for fight over wind power

30 Wednesday Mar 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Community said ‘no’ to giant wind power plant and Mayor aims to fight for their wishes … and sense

Image result for free image boxing gloves

North Frontenac Mayor Ron Higgins told the audience for a noon-hour public affairs show yesterday that he is “game” for a fight against wind power projects … and he is gathering steam among other municipalities to “bring it on.”

Although North Frontenac missed a contract in the recent announcement by the IESO, he is under no illusion that his community, where the majority of residents are opposed to a wind power project, is safe.

“Those bids” will just roll over into the next round, he said, and his community is not only ready, they are striking out for change. Last week, North Frontenac Council passed a resolution asking the provincial government to make municipal support a mandatory requirement in the new bid process, not just a means to score higher in points for wind power developers.

In spite of declarations by more than 90 communities in Ontario that they were “Not A Willing Host” to the power projects, the Independent Electricity Systems Operator (IESO) awarded contracts to unwilling communities anyway.

Higgins’ issue is not only are community wishes overruled by the current process, the fact is wind power doesn’t live up to the hype. “It isn’t really ‘green’,” he said, citing studies which list concerns about the need for fossil-fuel back up and the possibility that greenhouse gas emissions actually increase with wind power.

The Ontario government never did any studies on cost-benefit analysis, Higgins said, echoing two Auditors General in Ontario, and the real impacts of industrial-scale wind power development are not known. But there are enough concerns about damage to the environment, health impacts due to the noise and vibration, and the alteration to North Frontenac’s scenic landscape to worry him.

“Here in North Frontenac,” he said, “we never take action without studying everything … the province didn’t do that.”

Listen to the interview on Rideau Lakes radio station Lake88 here: https://t.co/rfub3uVCyo

See the North Frontenac Resolution here

[Originally posted on windconcernsontario.ca ]

Chiarelli promises more input on wind farm locations (again)

28 Monday Mar 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Rubbing salt in the wounds of the communities who just got notice of wind power contracts forced on them, despite unwilling host declarations, Energy Minister now says process will allow for input earlier in the process. (We’re still not hearing communities can say “No.”)

Just a little bit more "input"? But Bob still doesn't want to hear you say "no."

Just a little bit more “input”? But Bob still doesn’t want to hear you say “no.”

simcoe.com, March 28, 2016

By Jenni Dunning Barrie Examiner

Towns to have input ahead of solar, wind farm decisions

A few weeks after the province approved a wind energy project in Clearview Township, sparking an appeal, Ontario’s energy minister said municipalities will soon be asked for input ahead of future decisions.

“There was a problem with particular large wind and solar farms. There was not enough of an alignment of what they were doing and what the municipalities wanted,” said Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli.

“We are in the process now… It involves much more communication with the municipality. It (will be) almost impossible for (contractors) to win a contract without having participation with a municipality.”

Chiarelli clarified that “participation” referred to approval from a municipality, adding all contractors will be required to show proof they consulted municipalities. One wind energy and 13 solar projects have been approved in Simcoe County, according to the provincial Renewable Energy Projects Listing.

The Clearview project is the only wind farm. There are five solar energy projects in Springwater Township (three of which are in Midhurst), four in Tay Township (three of which are in Waubaushene), three in Orillia, and one in Oro-Medonte.

Chiarelli said he expects the ministry to announce more projects “in a month or two.”

Springwater Township Mayor Bill French said he has noticed the province has slowly started asking municipalities for more input on solar and wind projects in the past year.

They have been asked to use a scoring system to rank their support for proposed projects, he said.

“We always thought there should be a final approval process at the municipal level. It should’ve always been that way,” he said. “We’re quite welcome to that change in legislation.”

French said the township has been concerned when “fairly good agricultural land” was chosen as the location for solar farms.

“The ones that are approved, you can’t turn back the clock on those ones,” he said, adding once municipalities are more involved, Springwater will likely approve energy projects in areas with steep slopes or on smaller properties.

“Multi-acre ones, that’s going to be much more of a challenge,” he said. “We have acres and acres of rooftops around. That’s where solar panels belong.”

Collingwood Mayor Sandra Cooper said she has heard the promise of more municipal involvement from Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne.

“I’m hopeful. I just have not seen it thus far,” she said. “Municipalities have been sending the message for quite some time — we need to be part of the process.”

Cooper and the rest of Collingwood council voted last month to legally oppose plans to build a wind farm with eight turbines west of Stayner, near the Collingwood Regional Airport. The town is concerned about the possibility of a plane hitting a turbine.

Cooper said the province made a “snap decision” to approve a wind farm despite of this possibility.

By allowing municipalities more say in the approval process, they can help stop decisions that may negatively affect residents, said Oro-Medonte Mayor Harry Hughes.

For example, a couple in the township built a home about five years ago that ended up being surrounded by a solar farm, he said.

“If municipalities had a say in it, that would never have happened,” he said. “Residents expect their municipal council to have some protection for their property.”

When municipalities are more involved, they can demand companies complete up-to-date soil testing to avoid solar projects taking up quality agricultural land, he added.

The province also does not require companies to repair local roads if damage is caused by solar or wind projects, but some have anyway in Oro-Medonte, said Hughes. …

Read the full story here.