Wind power project siting process needs to be replaced, says Ottawa Wind Concerns

18 Thursday Jul 2013

Posted by in Health, Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

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

Posted by the Ottawa Citizen:

Wind-power projects as harmful as cancelled gas plants, critic contends

By Elizabeth Payne, OTTAWA CITIZEN July 18, 2013 6:04 PM
 OTTAWA —The same process that led to Ontario’s “gas plant fiasco” is being used for wind-generation projects with disastrous results, says the head of a group concerned about a proposed wind farm in rural southern Ottawa.

“The gas plants got all the attention, but the wind-power projects are more widespread — and causing real problems for communities in terms of health problems, social disruption, lost property value and harm to the natural environment,” wrote Jane Wilson in a submission to the Ontario Power Generation and the Independent Energy System Operator as part of a “dialogue” about the way the province locates large power projects.

The consultation process stemmed from the political controversy around the location, and cancellation, of planned gas plants in southern Ontario. The Liberal government’s handling of the costly gas plant issue is the subject of an inquiry and a criminal investigation.

Ottawa Wind Concerns, which Wilson heads (in addition to Wind Concerns Ontario) wants a new system for planning and siting all large energy projects, including wind, that gives local communities more control. The Liberal government’s Green Energy Act gave the province control over location of wind energy projects. In May, the provincial government announced changes that will make developers work more closely with municipalities.

Ottawa Wind Concerns says, however, that the province needs to go further and give municipalities full control over projects as well as treating them the same way an industrial project would be treated. So far 60 municipalities across the province have declared themselves not willing hosts to wind power projects.

“Local land use planning needs to be returned to communities as a start and power projects should be treated as any other sort of infrastructure, with residents having full input to decisions that will affect their community, their financial futures and their health.”

Although many people living near wind turbines complain about health effects, research into the issue is limited. Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health, in a 2010 report, concluded that “the scientific evidence available to date does not demonstrate a direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.” It also concluded that sound from wind turbines with common setbacks is not sufficient to cause hearing problems, although people might find it annoying. It also said there is no scientific evidence that vibrations from low-frequency wind turbine noise causes health issues. The report also said that “community engagement at the outset of planning for wind turbines is important and may alleviate health concerns.”

Health Canada has launched a major study into the effect of wind turbines on health. Meanwhile, federal cabinet minister Pierre Poilievre and Conservative MPP Lisa MacLeod, both of whom represent the riding where the project is planned, are calling for a moratorium on the North Gower project until the Health Canada study is completed.

A spokesman for the company that is proposing to build the project, Prowind Canada Inc., said it is temporarily on hold until the province determines what the new process for awarding wind power contracts will look like.

Rochelle Rumney, environmental co-ordinator with the company, said — environmental coordinator said Prowind would “like to work with the community and try to have everybody be comfortable with the project.”

Meanwhile, during an ongoing July heat wave that has strained the power grid, wind power contributed less than one per cent to Ontario’s power needs this week, something that Wilson says underlines the need for a cost-benefit analysis of wind-power projects.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
OWC notes: despite community opposition, and opposition from elected representatives, despite clear evidence this project will cost taxpayers/ratepayers $4.8 million a year for power we don’t need, it looks like Prowind is still prepared to proceed with the North Gower-Richmond project…or sell it to someone who is. That means, we need even more help and especially funds for legal counsel. Donations welcome at PO Box 3, North Gower ON   K0A 2T0 Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Impact of Ottawa wind power project would be ‘staggering’

16 Tuesday Jul 2013

Posted by in Health, Ottawa, Renewable energy

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

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

Community group Ottawa Wind Concerns has filed a formal comment with the Ontario Power Authority and the Independent Electricity System Operator as part of the “dialogue” process on siting large power projects in Ontario.

Placing a huge wind power project as proposed in the North Gower and Richmond communities, part of the City of Ottawa, would have “staggering” effects, the group says, in terms of negative health impacts and on property values.

On a day when wind power is contributing considerably less than one percent to Ontario’s power needs during the current heat wave, OWC’s chair Jane Wilson said that a thorough cost-benefit analysis, including comparison to other forms of power generation and the impact on communities, should be done for this and every wind power project.

“Ontario needs a new process,” she says. “That starts with a return of local land use planning and the recognition that wind power projects should be treated as any other type of infrastructure.”

MP Pierre Poilievre, MPP Lisa MacLeod and Ottawa City Councillor have all expressed opposition to the wind power project.

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Read the full comment document here: OPA-commentJuly11

Donations welcome, please mail to PO Box 3, North Gower ON  K0A 2T0

Green Energy Act “bigger debacle” than gas plant scandal

27 Thursday Jun 2013

Posted by in Health, Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Here from today’s Financial Post, a comment from Parker Gallant, on the cost of the Green Energy and Green Economy Act. He estimates $1,100 per household per year, but that’s not including property value loss for areas living near wind power projects…Ontario is in deep, deep trouble, and it’s not over yet.

The Ontario Power Authority is currently tripping through Ontario asking communities what will make them happier about the planning process for large-scale power projects.

Here is Parker Gallant: http://www.freewco.blogspot.ca/2013/06/parker-gallant-ontario-green-energy-act.html

Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com (join our confidential email list for updates) and please donate toward our legal and other costs PO Box 3 North Gower ON  K0A 2T0

Ontario Government’s green power policy: an “abject failure”

25 Tuesday Jun 2013

Posted by in Health, Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Here today from the Waterloo Region Record, a comment on the McGuinty government’s “green energy” program which was meant to bring jobs and prosperity to Ontario, while cleaning up our air (never mind that the air pollution in Southern Ontario is from cars and trucks).

The author rightly points out that the government continues to put a brave face on its policy, even as it disintegrates daily. What the author of this comment doesn’t know, is that the Ontario government continues to approve giant wind power projects weekly. In fact, this month has seen a record number of project approvals, including one at West Lincoln, which had passed a resolution at Council declaring itself not to be a “willing host” to wind power on this scale.

Here is the comment. Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com and donations are most welcome for legal and other costs at PO Box 3, North Gower ON  K0A 2T0

http://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/3854511-a-white-flag-for-green-energy/

A white flag for green energy

Waterloo Region Record

The Ontario Liberals are striving mightily to portray their disastrous green energy program as a rousing success. Do not believe them. It is an abject failure that inflated electricity costs, alienated rural communities and never lived up to its billing as the engine not just of more jobs but an entirely new manufacturing sector.

This is the context in which to understand last week’s announcement that the province had downsized a multi-billion dollar deal it signed with Samsung Group in 2010 to produce electricity from wind and solar projects.

Instead of giving the South Korean corporate giant $9.7 billion for 2,500 megawatts of electricity, Ontario will spend $6 billion for 1,369 megawatts. We pay less. We also get less. Samsung is cutting its investment in new green energy plants and components in Ontario from the $7 billion it originally pledged to $5 billion.

Although the government once boasted that Samsung would create 16,000 new manufacturing jobs, the number of new workers being talked about last week was just 900. That’s a flimsy foundation for an economic renaissance.

Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli defended the latest Samsung agreement as a way “to bend the cost curve (down) for ratepayers.” But even he can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. The best that can be said of his accomplishment is that the government’s ill-conceived and poorly delivered green energy crusade will leave ratepayers battered but not comatose.

Go back a few years and remember then-premier Dalton McGuinty’s grand and hubristic vision of turning this province into a green utopia. Making everyone pay far more for wind and solar energy than other sources of electricity was the key to his plan. Sure it would hurt consumers — but it would be worth it.

Not only would the McGuinty brain trust produce more energy for Ontario, it would do so in an environmentally friendly way. To top it all off, in the wake of the devastating recession of 2008-09 in which thousands of the province’s factory jobs were lost, the Liberals were going to create a thriving green energy industry that would sell to a global market.

It turns out McGuinty was a modern-day Don Quixote tilting at wind turbines. He was off on just about every premise. The World Trade Organization recently struck down the made-in-Ontario provision in McGuinty’s program.

The Liberals overestimated Ontario’s energy needs. The recession drove down demand for electricity and the province wound up with a surplus of it. We don’t need all the electricity Samsung was originally contracted to deliver.

The job boom never materialized either. As it happens, China can make solar panels far cheaper than Ontario. No wonder one of Canada’s most touted solar power firms, Arise Technology Corporation of Cambridge, went bankrupt last year while solar energy equipment maker Silken SA closed its Windsor operation.

And the bloated cost of this energy scheme will hurt for years to come. In 2011, Auditor General Jim McCarter estimated Ontario’s green energy policies were adding $220 million a year to the province’s already soaring hydro bills which were now among the most expensive in North America. No wonder the government scaled back its rates for green energy.

With McGuinty now gone and Kathleen Wynne in the premier’s office, the government is running away from the green energy program as fast as it can. The Samsung agreement has been overhauled. In future, priority will be given to wind turbine projects where there is community support.

For months, Ontarians have been justifiably outraged by the same government’s cavalier cancellation of two gas-fired electricity plants, arguably for political reasons and at a cost to the public of at least $585 million. The green energy program is as big a fiasco — and will cost more in the long-run.

 

Environmental Review Tribunal wraps up: evidence shows harm to human health ‘probable’

24 Monday Jun 2013

Posted by in Health, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County
P.O. Box 173
Milford, Ontario K0K 2P0

APPEC Appeal Shows Probability of Harm to Human health

Milford, ON  June 24, 2013.   The Environmental Review Tribunal hearings on the Ostrander Point wind project concluded in Toronto on June 21.   The Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County (APPEC) has presented evidence that indicates the probability of harm to human health from wind turbines.

Summations by counsel for APPEC, Gilead Power, and the Ministry of Environment (MOE) focused on three important issues:  the relevance of the Erickson appeal (2011), the medical evidence presented, and the standard of proof required.

APPEC lawyer Eric Gillespie argued that reliance on the Erickson decision avoids an onerous and unmanageable process of re-litigation on matters already addressed by 25 expert witnesses. The present ERT has to consider the principal findings in Erickson because they relate to a wind project, like Ostrander Point, approved to operate with 40 dBA noise limits and 550-m setbacks.

Mr. Gillespie urged the ERT panel to accept the testimony of 11 witnesses who reported adverse health effects from living near currently-operating wind projects.  All of them have suffered a range of symptoms known to result from exposure to audible noise and low-frequency sound. Expert opinion has related these to the proximity of wind turbines as far as 2 km away.

Gilead’s and the MOE’s own witnesses, said Mr. Gillespie, have testified that there are always “some people,” or a “non-trivial percentage of the population,” affected by wind turbines. APPEC’s case has shown the probability, not just biological plausibility, of serious harm to human health.  There is enough evidence on the “balance of probabilities” for the ERT to make a decision.

 

“People are obviously suffering despite the MOE’s regulations,” said APPEC President Gord Gibbins. “There will be more victims if Ostrander Point and other wind projects go ahead.”

The ERT panel also questioned the location of the wind project on Crown land.  The public will have access to the site via 5.4 km of maintenance road and would be exposed to the risks of ice throw, blade breakage, nacelle fire, and tower collapse. 

“These concerns are another sign,” said Gord Gibbins, “that public health and safety appear to be secondary to wind power development.”

The ERT’s decision is due by July 10.

-30-

For more information, please contact:

Henri Garand, Chair, Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County, 613-476-4527, hgarand@xplornet.ca

Better ways to spend $40 billion in Ontario

20 Thursday Jun 2013

Posted by in Health, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

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

See the news release from the County Coalition for Safe Affordable Green Energy, in which the group suggests that maybe, just maybe, there might be better things to do with the $40 billion Ontario will hand over in subsidy to giant corporate wind power developers (who have suddenly developed a taste for litigation against communities resisting the invasive power plants).

Transit improvements really would solve the problem of air pollution in Toronto and southern Ontario.

For immediate release   

Ontario’s $40-billion wind power subsidy: spend it  on transit and hospitals

PICTON, ONTARIO, JUNE 20TH, 2013–  On June 17th the County Coalition for Safe and Appropriate Green Energy (CCSAGE) wrote to all Ontario MPPs advising that the McGuinty/Smitherman wind power fantasy will cost citizens $40 billion in increased electricity and tax bills over 20 years.  CCSAGE believes this money is better spent on transit and hospitals.

$40 billion is 145 times the mere $275 million recently reported by the Auditor-General as the cost for relocating the Mississauga gas plant.  Garth Manning, Chair of CCSAGE, noted that: “Our electricity bills are increasing dramatically.  That $40 billion could be much better spent,” he said.  “Let’s put a hold on wind power generation—an inefficient and unreliable technology—and reallocate those huge wind power subsidies to areas of much greater need.”

Manning urged MPPs to consider how half of that amount could upgrade an eco-friendly Metrolinx transit system for the GTHA.  “MPPs should also know how the other half could save threatened community hospitals,” he said.

“People in the Greater Toronto-Hamilton Area (GTHA) are living with gridlock, creating an urban air pollution cloud over all,” said Jane Wilson, RN, President of Wind Concerns Ontario. “At the same time, residents of rural communities are being forced to live with massive industrial scale wind power projects that result in sleep disturbance, property devaluation, wildlife killings, destroyed landscapes, tourism losses, lost quality of life, and divided communities,” she said.

CCSAGE recognizes that half of Ontario citizens live in the GTHA where gridlock and air pollution are worsening.  The other half live in rural areas and smaller cities where community hospitals are on virtual life support.

“Let’s turn off that $40 billion tap that is flowing to noisy spinning turbines in Ontario’s once peaceful countryside.  Let’s use it to pay for practical green transit systems and caring community hospitals,” said Manning.  “Ontario has become occupied territory…occupied by the Big Wind developers.  Let’s get our Ontario back,” he said.

—30—

Contacts:          Garth Manning email gmanning@xplornet.com

Jim McPherson email ccsage@kos.net

Jane Wilson email  wco.president@gmail.com

Time for the Chief Medical Officer of Health to step up

18 Tuesday Jun 2013

Posted by in Health, Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

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

Wind Concerns Ontario announced today that it has formally requested the Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr Arlene King, to follow up on the numerous complaints of excessive noise and ill health, coming from people who are living near or among large-scale wind turbines in Ontario.

Dr King produced a report, which was a simple literature review, in 2010 which found no “direct” link between turbine noise and health problems. That report was widely criticized as being inadequate and based on industry-selected literature, but it has served the wind power development lobby very well, serving as a rubber stamp on health from the Ontario government.

A lot of water has passed under a lot of bridges since: the 2011 Environmental Review Tribunal decision noted that the government ought to keep pace with research on the health impacts, and review and revise regulations as needed—it hasn’t done that.

Dr King herself recommended more research, specifically on the noise. It hasn’t done that either and in fact while acknowledging that infrasound (vibration, sound pressure) could be a problem, it won’t even have guidelines for infrasound until 2015.

By that time, with the government continuing to approve two or three wind power projects a month, everything that is planned or proposed will be built.

Wind Concerns says the government has a duty to investigate the complaints coming from residents under the Health Protection and Promotion Act. With the current Environmental Tribunal concluding this week, after hearing from expert witnesses and actual wind turbine noise victims, it would be appropriate for the government to act.

It is especially important for the people of North Gower and Richmond, where a wind power project would expose hundreds of people–including the property owners leasing land for turbines themselves– to environmental noise and vibration, for the regulations to be revised based on the on-the-ground experiences.

See the news story and actual letter here: http://www.freewco.blogspot.ca/2013/06/wco-demands-investigation-of-noise.html

Toronto Star’s Walkom: matters just keep getting worse

06 Thursday Jun 2013

Posted by in Health, Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

In yesterday’s Toronto Star, veteran commentator Thomas Walkom passed judgment on the Wynne government’s recent fixes to the Green Energy and Green Economy Act: “Its efforts may be too little. They are definitely late.”

Walkom noted that distasteful projects get the heave-ho in Toronto, but the huge wind power projects are located in rural Ontario and the government has been “unbending” and refused to “accept persistent claims from local residents that wind farms put their health at risk….in virtually all cases, the Liberals sided with the big, private generating companies seeking to establish these profitable wind farms.”

The announcement of changes last week by Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli, Walkom said, is no big change at all: “in a CBC radio interview following his announcement, Chiarelli made it clear:Queen’s Park still reserves the right to authorize more large-scale, private wind farms, even if local residents and councils are opposed.

“Ironically,” he adds, “the government continues to defend its green energy policy at a time when, in one important regard, it is no longer relevant…” and he goes on to say that coal is shut down and the WTO decision on Ontario’s 60-% content rule will affect the government’s plans for a manufacturing boost in Ontario.

“[F]for a government trying to present itself and its wind turbine allies as sensitive to the needs of ordinary people, matters just keep getting worse.”

See the whole article here: http://www.freewco.blogspot.ca/2013/06/wind-turbine-reforms-fail-to-quell.html

 

The Chiarelli-Wynne non-announcement for Ontario municipalities: nothing has changed

03 Monday Jun 2013

Posted by in Health, Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

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

Last week, Energy Minister and former Ottawa Mayor Bob Chiarelli announced that Ontario would in future increase “local control” in renewable energy development. This was in reaction to the fact that in recent weeks, almost 40 municipalities took the step of formally passing a resolution to say they are NOT a “willing host” to wind power projects, picking up on remarks made months earlier by Premier Kathleen Wynne.

Mr Chiarelli announced that a new process will “replace the existing large project stream of Feed-In Tariff (FIT) program and better meet the needs of communities.”

A new “competitive procurement process for projects over 500 kW” will be announced in the fall.

What does it all mean?

Absolutely nothing.

In fact, things may even be worse for communities who don’t wish to expose their residents to the health impacts, property value loss, and social divisions that come along with large-scale wind power generation projects.

Note the wording: “meet the needs of communities.” What the province is saying it will now do is develop Regional Energy Plans and the new process will “require energy planners and developers to work directly with municipalities to identify appropriate locations and site requirements.”

We’re not sure who the “energy planners” are but take this scenario: a regional energy plan for Ottawa and area is developed and the province says there must be a mix of power sources. Therefore, a wind power project, and guess what? There’s already one in process in North Gower-Richmond*, or countless other communities across Ontario near large urban centres, so, carry on! And we know that siting wind power projects has NOTHING to do with health or the environment and everything to do with a few willing landowners.

And the Liberal government’s continuing policy of forcing wind power projects on rural and small urban communities.

Premier Wynne confirmed this in an interview last Friday when she said Ontario is continuing its goal of securing the province’s clean energy future, and that siting decisions will be made for the “greater good.”

That means, too bad for you North Gower and Richmond. Hundreds of families, young children, people with existing health problems, young families with everything invested in their homes suddenly forced to live with a power project? Too bad for you: it’s for the “greater good.”

This announcement was the Ontario government at its most cynical.

Scott Stinson wrote in The National Post, referring to the government’s earlier decision to pay power developers even if we don’t need the power: “So now Ontario will pay wind generators for energy that it isn’t even using, produced by turbines in communities that didn’t want them, and were installed under a set of rules that it has since admitted was a mistake.” http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/06/02/scott-stinson-rural-communities-not-blow-away-by-changes-to-ontarios-green-energy-act/

Wainfleet Mayor April Jeffs today wrote a letter to Premier Wynne on behalf of the 20 some municipalities that met earlier this year and formed a working group. While Mr Chiarelli claims that the province is unable to cancel, or not proceed on, projects with FIT contracts, Mayor Jeffs reminds him that this is not true: “the recent court decision in the lawsuit brought by Trillium Power indicated that this concern does not apply to projects that have not received REA approvals. FIT contract holders have only been granted permission to enter a ‘complex regulatory process’ that might lead to approval to build a wind project. A FIT contract is not a guarantee of a REA approval.”

In other words, with all due respect, Minister, you are lying.

For more on this we invite you to read Parker Gallant’s excellent column at Wind Concerns Ontario, The truth, whole truth, so help me Ontario. http://freewco.blogspot.ca/2013/06/the-truth-whole-truth-so-help-me-ontario.html

Contact us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com 

Middlesex-Lambton, Listowel, Prince Edward County, Haldimand, West Lincoln, Bluewater, Kincardine, Collingwood… for a list of wind power projects pending go to ontario-wind-turbines.org

The Wiggins decision: what it means for leaseholders (You’re about to get sued)

28 Tuesday May 2013

Posted by in Health, Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Last year, a group of property owners in the Collingwood area, decided to sue both the wind power developer (wpd, from Germany) and the landowners who, together, had put forward a proposal for a wind power generation project.

The landowners, led by a Mr and Mrs Wiggins, maintained that they had already suffered property value loss and that if the project was approved, those losses would continue and escalate. The Wiggins own an equestrian facility worth over $1.5 million and had listed it for sale; once the wind power project was announced, interest in the property evaporated.

The wind power developer asked the court to determine whether their action had any merit and asked for a summary judgement on the legal action.

Things didn’t go quite as planned.

Yes, the judge decided in her decision*, this is not the appropriate time to proceed with this action and it was denied. BUT, she said, if the project does receive approval from the government to proceed, THEN the plaintiffs were free to pursue their legal action.

While there was “no genuine issue for trial” at this time, she ruled, [Section 13], “It is possible however that they may be wronged by one or more of the defendants committing a tort in the future when and if the Fairview Wind Project is either given approval and/or constructed. [sic: it can’t be constructed without approval, but we digress] For that reason the claims are being dismissed without prejudice to the plaintiffs’ rights to advance the same and other claims in the future in relation to this venture. [Section 37]

The evidence showed, the judge said, that “they [the plaintiffs] have already suffered harm through loss in property values and the corresponding interference with the use and enjoyment of their properties.” [Section 9]

The judge also accepted evidence from Dr Robert McMurtry on the potential for negative health impacts.

What this means for the owners of properties neighbouring land where wind turbines have been proposed is that the minute a project is approved by the Ministry of the Environment, you can file a claim.

The leaseholders (i.e., people leasing land for turbines to a wind power developer) ought to be forewarned that claims will be filed in Ontario. In the North Gower-Richmond area, a conservative estimate of the property value loss within 3 km is $67 million. The wind power project is proposed by Germany-based Prowind for two area farms, Cornerview and Gowerdale. More than 300 homes are within 3 km of the project.

Contact us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com and please donate for our legal advice which helps us all at PO Box 3 North Gower ON  K0A 2T0

* Superior Court of Justice-Ontario, Case CV-12-0344 Wiggins et al vs WPD Canada and Beattie Brothers Farms Ltd