MPAC report: NO effect on property values from wind turbines

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Well, what can you say about this. Realtors are telling us that buyers are saying, If I can see a turbine from the house, I’m not buying it. And Ontario-based research has shown significant property value loss for properties neighbouring wind power projects.

But the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (which reports to the Ontario Minister of Finance) says, No. No effect. No problem. No loss.

No kidding.

Read the report here but be aware it is pretty technical. It has to be, to avoid the obvious.

What MPAC left out is very interesting: they didn’t do the area prior to the Green Energy Act, where property value losses have already occurred and the market was distorted significantly, and they left off vacant lots, where the wind power developers have had to go in and buy houses that were rendered uninhabitable and were then removed. They also studied turbines 1.5 MW and larger, which again, leaves off the older turbines and the areas in Ontario where the impact has already been felt.

A number of people are offering critiques on this but here is an excellent commentary from the website Wind Farm Realities at:

http://windfarmrealities.org/mpacs-2012-study/

The MPAC study is self-serving, misleading, and obscuring of the truth. But it will serve its purpose for this government which is to quash requests for assessment reconsideration, and put a chill on legal actions and request from Assessment Review Board hearings.

Once again, the citizens of Ontario are at a disadvantage against Big Wind.

SW Liberal ridings in trouble

Tags

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

Problem-plagued LIberals have lost support in 10 ridings in SW Ontario

April 20, 2014

Deborah Van Brenk

If the minority Liberal government can’t pass its budget next month, Ontario will be plunged into a widely expected spring election. Deb Van Brenk tested the early voter mood in the 10-riding London region, driving its Hwy. 401 backbone. Once almost solidly Liberal, the region now has only one Grit left standing. High power bills, the gas plants scandal, wind turbines — voters are chafing at many issues.

HOW THE REGION HAS VOTED

2011 (Liberal minority government):

Conservatives: 7

Liberals: 2 (MPP Chris Bentley later resigned in 2013)

NDP: 1 (gained Bentley’s London West seat in 2013 byelection)

2007 (Liberal majority)

Conservatives: 2

Liberals: 8

2003 (Liberal majority)

Conservatives: 1

Liberals: 9

Glen Ure says he doesn’t want wind turbines on his property, because of potential difficulties selling his farm near Chatham, not because he’s worried about any health issues as his farm is surrounded by the large structures. Mike Hensen/The London Free Press/QMI Agency

Where: Hwy 401 at Kent Bridge Rd. (Chatham-Kent-Essex riding)

Who: Farmer Glen Ure

From just this overpass, between the West Lorne and Chatham exits, 76 wind turbines are visible in the near and far horizon.

Some sprout just beyond the borders of Glen Ure’s farm, where he’s lived all his life and where his parents farmed before him.

Elsewhere in the region, others battle turbines out of health concerns but Ure rejected offers to be a wind landlord because he wasn’t satisfied with the wind companies’ answers to his many questions. Governments and energy companies control enough of his life and he’s not about to let them control his land, too.

Anyone looking for his vote will face a barrage of questions:

— Why have his power bills soared to $6,600 a year, even as he uses less electricity?

— Why spend more than $1 billion, as the Liberal government did, to relocate two gas plants because of city people’s concerns while ignoring rural issues?

— Why have taxes gone up without measurable benefit to him and his neighbours?

His biggest question? Why, in his 70 years of farming and then trucking and then farming and retirement, have governments promised the world but delivered less than dirt?

“An old farmer told me, when I was 10 years old, ‘politics is like pig farming. You get one person in, fatten him up and kick him out, get another one in, fatten them up and kick them out.’ You vote people in and think they’re going to do all right (but they don’t follow through).”

Read the full story and comments here.

Wind Concerns Ontario asks Ombudsman to look at wind power approval process

Tags

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

Wind Concerns Ontario has sent a letter to the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario, asking that aspects of the approval process for wind power projects be looked at. The Ombudsman’s office has now had its role expanded to be able to look at issues of municipal concern, which may allow it to address the request of many municipalities throughout Ontario facing wind power developments and who are without any say in the siting of these projects. The Green Energy and Green Economy Act passed in 2009, over-rode 21 others Acts in Ontario, and removed local land use planning powers for Ontario municipalities with regard to renewable power projects. In the wake of municipal objections ever since, the Ontario government now says it will offer municipalities more “say” but still no veto.

That’s unacceptable says Wind Concerns Ontario, which refers to important issues:

  • documentation provided to the Ministry of the Environment is being “deemed complete” and then going to public comment; community groups performing audits on this documentation are finding, however, that the documents are often not complete and sometimes absent altogether—not acceptable
  • land leases are signed between the power developers and landowners, which means municipalities and residents can have no idea where turbines are going to be located until too late; this has the effect of halting real estate sales and “sterilizing” development
  • wind power developers (e.g., Samsung in Southgate) are now offering significant sums of money in return for municipal approval and other items such a building permits, road use, etc.
  • landowners are not being provided with the full range of information on the potential negative effects of having wind turbines on their properties

See the news release and link to the letter to the Ombudsman here.

In other news, the community near Woodstock Ontario, facing an 18-MW Prowind wind power project, has also filed a letter of complaint with the Ombudsman, citing deficiencies in documentation, and changes being made to documents AFTER the public comment period has closed. See the East Oxford Community Alliance story here. Prowind is the Germany-based developer that proposed a wind power project for the North Gower-Richmond area of Ottawa, which would have placed 10 turbines on local farm properties within 3 km of more than 1,000 families. The project is now on hold, waiting for the new large-scale renewable power procurement process to begin.

Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Economist: Ontario’s actions on electricity bills possibly illegal

Tags

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

From Ottawa energy economist Robert Lyman:

THE $6.2 BILLION SLEIGHT-OF-HAND

 Parker Gallant is a retired banker who has done tremendous service to the people of Ontario by reporting publicly on the Ontario government’s mismanagement of the province’s electrical energy system. In an analysis he posted on April 11, 2014, Mr. Gallant applied his knowledge of financial management and accounting to reveal the damaging and possibly illegal actions of the Liberal government with respect to the Debt Retirement Charge included in the monthly electricity bills of Ontario residents. The analysis can be found online here:

http://ep.probeinternational.org/2014/04/11/parker-gallant-the-debt-retirement-charge-premier-wynnes-6-2-billion-revenue-tool-5/#more-12245

This note offers my explanation, in layperson’s terms, of what Mr. Gallant revealed.

Background

In 1998 the Ontario government launched a major restructuring of the province’s publicly-owned electricity industry. One aspect of this restructuring was the breakup of Ontario Hydro into five successor companies on April 1, 1999.

The Ontario Ministry of Finance determined that, on April 1, 1999, Ontario Hydro’s total debt and other liabilities stood at $38.1 billion, which greatly exceeded the estimated $17.2 billion market value of the assets being transferred to the new entities. The resulting shortfall of $20.9 billion was determined to be “stranded debt”, representing the total debt and other liabilities of Ontario Hydro that the Ministry judged could not be serviced in “a competitive electricity environment”. This total was subsequently reduced to $19.4 billion when it was adjusted for $1.5 billion of additional assets transferred to OEFC. Responsibility for servicing and managing the “legacy” debt of Ontario Hydro, which includes the stranded debt, was given to the Ontario Electricity Financial Corporation (OEFC), whose opening balance sheet reflected a stranded debt, or unfunded liability, of $19.4 billion. This was the difference between the $18.7 billion value of assets assumed by the OEFC and the $38.1 billion of Ontario Hydro legacy debt.

To retire the debt, the government established a long-term plan wherein the burden of debt repayment would be borne partly through dedicated revenues from the electricity sector companies – Ontario Power Generation (OPG), Hydro One, and Municipal Electrical Utilities – and partly by electricity consumers directly. (Bear in mind that all the revenues from the electricity sector companies come from electricity consumers, so electricity consumers pay all the costs, one way or the other.). The electricity companies would make “payments in lieu of taxes” to the OEFC (this is, in theory, the equivalent of corporate income taxes). It was projected that future revenues from OPG and Hydro One and municipal electricity distributors would generate $11.6 billion over the next eight to nine years.

To read the full article click here.THE $6.2 Billion Sleight-of-Hand

Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Have you seen this bird?

Tags

, ,

 

 

 

 

bobolink (1)

The members of the Blackbird family–red-winged blackbirds and grackles–are returning to the Ottawa area. A lesser known member of the family is the Bobolink, which is endangered protected in Ontario.

If you see a Bobolink this spring, or at any time, please log the time, date and location you saw it—this may be needed at some point in future to audit wind power developers’ environmental assessments.

 

Eastern Ontario farmers on turbines: expensive, inefficient, and No thanks

Tags

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

According to the Eastern edition of Farmers Forum, the paper did a survey at the recent Farm Show in Ottawa and asked people whether they “approve” of wind turbines.

The startling result is the majority of those responding said they did NOT approve of large-scale wind turbines, and the reason for most was that wind power was expensive and inefficient. Several remarked on what having turbines would do to their community (thank you! You are the good guys!) and others said that the economics just didn’t make any sense. The Auditor General for Ontario said that to the government in 2011, but it still has not done any cost-benefit analysis.

Note that one North Gower area farm owner said he is “not allergic to money” and would still put one on his property—not where he lives, we venture.

Farmers not sold on wind turbines, survey says

By Brandy Harrison

OTTAWA — While farmers are among the few who can directly benefit financially from hosting wind turbines, Eastern Ontario farmers are more likely to oppose than support them, a Farmers Forum survey shows.

In a random survey of 100 farmers at the Ottawa Valley Farm Show from March 11 to 13, nearly half — 48 per cent — disapproved of wind turbines. Another 29 per cent approved and the remaining 23 per cent said they were neutral.

But positions on the issue weren’t always clear cut. Even when farmers threw their lot in with one side of the debate or the other, their reasoning was peppered with pros and cons.

It’s in stark contrast to a Farmers Forum survey of 50 Western Ontario farmers at the London Farm Show in early March, where 58 per cent were strongly opposed to wind turbines. Farmers opposed outnumbered those who approved by nearly three-to-one.

The number of turbines reveal the difference: Of the 67 wind projects representing more than 1,200 turbines province-wide, almost all the turbines dot the landscape of Western Ontario. Only two projects are in Eastern Ontario, an 86-turbine project on Wolfe Island, south of Kingston, and another 10 turbines near Brinston, south of Winchester, which were completed in January.

Wind power is so controversial that 13 farmers polled at the farm show wanted to remain anonymous, unwilling to come out publicly as a supporter or a critic.

Nearly three-quarters of farmers who disapproved liked green energy in theory but panned turbines — and sometimes the Green Energy Act as a whole — as a too-costly, inefficient electricity source that’s driving up their power bill.

Eric VanDenBroek doesn’t mind the look of the turbines that are only a short drive from his Winchester dairy farm but isn’t a fan of the way the program was rolled out.

“Financially, it’s already proving to be a disaster,” …

Read the full story and see the chart of responses here.

 

Economist: cancel the Feed In Tariff, Ontario

Tags

, , , , , , ,

From today’s Financial Post, an opinion by economist Jack Mintz. Mintz holds the Palmer Chair in the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary and is the former chair of the CD Howe Institute.

Canada’s sagging middle: Ontario
Ontario’s growth has lagged the rest of Canada, averaging less than 1% annually since 2009
With Quebec’s election over, we can turn to Ontario where a scandal-plagued Liberal government will soon present its 2014 budget – and possibly trigger a spring election. Ontario is sagging under the weight of monstrous public debt, uncompetitive energy prices and rising taxes. Given Ontario’s size, other regions of Canada are being hurt.
Ontario has only one way out: economic growth. Luckily, the American economic recovery will significantly benefit Ontario. However, it won’t be enough. The government needs to get its house in order.
Pushing aggregate demand with deficit spending won’t achieve growth. Economic stimulus might provide some short-term relief but won’t generate sustained expansion. Instead, growth will be attained with supply-side policies by reducing onerous regulations, providing some smart tax reforms and shifting to growth-oriented spending, especially to address the notorious Greater Toronto Area infrastructure problem.
Nor will growth come from expansionary public programs like the proposed Ontario pension plan. Forcing people to hold assets in a government-sponsored plan might be helpful to some but it will be just another form of new taxation for others, who are already have adequate savings for retirement.
Ontario’s growth has lagged the rest of Canada, averaging less than 1% annually since 2009. Employment since 2009 has increased by 375,000 but the employment rate has fallen to U.S.-levels of 61.4% as of March 2014, far less than Alberta’s at almost 70%.
Ontario‘s fiscal picture is also not pretty, with gross debt over $290-billion (net debt is $272-billion), requiring $10.6-billion in taxes to cover interest charges. This expense is enormous, about one-half of education expenditures.
The average Ontario debt interest rate is only 4% but interest rates are expected to rise within the next few years. Each point increase in interest rates will add at least another $3-billion in annual interest expense.
Ontario’s energy prices are soaring. Look at any bill and one can read added delivery charges, regulatory charges, debt retirement charges and HST, resulting in an average price of 12.48 cents per kwh in Toronto for households. Large power customers pay 10.89 cents per kwh in Toronto, less than New York but higher than most eastern U.S. and Canadian cities.
Ontario made real progress in 2009 by adopting the HST to replace the provincial sales tax and reducing Ontario’s corporate and personal taxes to ensure that revenues would not increase. However, the province reneged on tax cuts only two years later.
The Ontario corporate income tax rate is stuck at 11.5%, compared to the promised 2009 legislated rate of 10%. None of this helps the province’s poor investment climate. Ontario’s share of business capital spending is only 32% of Canadian investment, less than its share of population and dramatically less than a decade ago.
Personal income tax rates have also increased to almost 50% at the top end, third highest in Canada. There is a reason why many high-income taxpayers have moved Alberta with its top rate of 39%. Alberta’s rich households, with over $500,000 in family income, account for 15% of Alberta’s taxable personal income. This ratio is two-thirds higher than Ontario.
Add in Ontario sales taxes at a 13% rate (about the average Canadian rate), fuel taxes (Ontario’s at 14.7 cent per litre is one of the highest in the country) and property taxes (Ontario is on the high side especially for non-residential property) – it all adds up to a yoke on growth.
Ontario’s Minister of Finance is in a bind. He needs more growth but he also has to deal with a large debt mountain and an uncompetitive tax system. So what are his options? Here is a five-point plan.
First, focus spending on growth-oriented programs. Transportation infrastructure should be on the top of the list as GTA traffic results in unproductive use of time.
Second, kill off the feed-in tariff program for wind and solar that creates excessive electricity costs for households and companies. This would both improve growth and help reduce administrative costs….

Read the full article here.

Hydro bill protest attracts hundreds to Chiarelli’s office

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Megan Dalaire, Ottawa Citizen April 4, 2014

Ottawa — Hundreds of people affected by Ontario’s rising energy prices gathered Friday in a protest against the province’s Long-Term Energy Plan outside of MPP Bob Chiarelli’s office on Carling Avenue.

The energy plan was announced by Chiarelli on Dec. 2 and is expected to save the province $16 billion on energy between 2013 and 2017, at a high cost to residential hydro customers, whose bills will rise by 42 per cent over next five years, 50 per cent over next 10 years, and 68 per cent over next 20 years. The cost of heating is an especially touchy subject to Ottawans, who have just experienced the city’s coldest winter in two decades, but the protesters Friday had their fellow Ontarians in mind as they rallied for the second time since December.

”Across the province people are hurting because of high gas prices,” said protest organizer Beth Trudeau. ”What we want to do is to give a voice to the people who don’t have a voice. The people who have to choose between heating and eating.”

Friday’s protest was part of a provincewide movement called Join the Fight Against Hydro Rates, which Trudeau said was originally started by two Dryden, Ont., women and now has thousands of supporters.

Complaints by protesters covered a range of issues, from hydro usage cost increases, high distribution rates, HST and surcharges, to the dubious reputation of smart meters installed by Hydro One to replace analog meters. Passing motorists honked their horns and…

Read the full story here.

Blog editor note: thanks to those of our members who attended the protest, and handed out the McGuinty FITy dollar bills, which details the reasons behind Ontario’s electricity bill increases. (They’re not what the government is telling you.)

Samsung project “dead” in Southgate

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Mayor says there were too many “issues” and not enough municipal control. Samsung’s proposed agreement demanded all building permits, access to roads and virtually everything they needed, in return for payments of $180,000 per year for the wind power project. Each of the 56 turbines would have netted Samsung $775,000 per year, under the government’s Feed In Tariff subsidy program.

The community held a meeting a few weeks ago, featuring a local Realtor who said property values in Southgate would disappear, and University of Guelph economics professor Ross McKitrick, who said wind power is expensive and ineffective as a reliable source of power.

Here is the news story.

News Centre

Samsung Project Dead

Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:28 AM by Jon Meyer

Southgate Council votes against the wind project with unwilling host status.

There is audio for this story.

MP3 - click to open click to open MP3 version

or click the play button to listen now.

(Southgate) – The large wind turbine project in Southgate has apparently been stopped.

Mayor Brian Milne says the Samsung, Pattern Energy project needed willing host status from the Township to move ahead.

At last night’s meeting, Milne says Council voted unanimously to stop the wind  project by declaring itself an unwilling host.

Milne says there was no way the township could resolve a number of issues it had with the project, without more control.

He says it was apparent the project would tear the community apart.

Samsung needed willing host status to move ahead with its 50 turbine, 120-megawatt wind farm proposal.

Milne applauds the Province for giving them that out clause, and the ability to say no.

But Milne wishes the Province gave them site plan control.

Instead, he says council had to say yes, with no conditions.

He says just three weeks ago Southgate was in the process of considering being a willing host.

But Milne says that was only if they could come to terms on a agreement on a number of issues — which included a good neighbour policy and issues around health and property values.

But Milne says they couldn’t come to those terms, and they had no choice but to stop the project.

The decision comes…

Read the full story here.

David Suzuki: turbines OK at my place (except I don’t really live there)

Tags

, , , , , , ,

David Suzuki says he’s OK with wind farm near his cabin

David Suzuki: Supporting wind power makes sense

I have a cabin on Quadra Island off the British Columbia coast that’s as close to my heart as you can imagine. From my porch you can see clear across the waters of Georgia Strait to the snowy peaks of the rugged Coast Mountains. It’s one of the most beautiful views I have seen. And I would gladly share it with a wind farm.

Sometimes it seems I’m in the minority. Across Europe and North America, environmentalists and others are locking horns with the wind industry over farm locations. In Canada, opposition to wind installations has sprung up from Nova Scotia to Ontario to Alberta to B.C. In the U.K., more than 100 national and local groups, led by some of the country’s most prominent environmentalists, have argued wind power is inefficient, destroys the ambience of the countryside and makes little difference to carbon emissions. And in the U.S., the Cape Wind Project, which would site 130 turbines off the coast of affluent Cape Cod, Massachusetts, has come under fire from famous liberals, including John Kerry and the late Sen. Edward Kennedy.
It’s time for some perspective. With the growing urgency of climate change, we can’t have it both ways. We can’t shout about the dangers of global warming and then turn around and shout even louder about the “dangers” of windmills. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges humanity will face this century. Confronting it will take a radical change in the way we produce and consume energyanother industrial revolution, this time for clean energy, conservation, and efficiency.
We’ve undergone such transformations before and we can again. But we must accept that all forms of energy have associated costs. Fossil fuels are limited in quantity, create vast amounts of pollution and contribute to climate change. Large-scale hydroelectric power floods valleys and destroys habitat. Nuclear power plants are expensive, create radioactive waste and take a long time to build.
Wind power also has its downsides. It’s highly visible and can kill birds. But any man-made structure (not to mention cars and house cats) can kill birds—houses, radio towers, skyscrapers. In Toronto alone, an estimated one million birds collide with the city’s buildings every year. In comparison, the risk to birds from well-sited wind farms is low. Even the U.K.’s Royal Society for the Protection of Birds says scientific evidence shows wind farms “have negligible impacts” on birds when they are appropriately located.

Read the full account here.