• About
  • BRINSTON/SOUTH BRANCH/NORTH DUNDAS/NORTH STORMONT
  • Donate!
  • Important documents
  • Regional power plan
  • The North Gower project
  • Wind Concerns Ontario

Ottawa Wind Concerns

~ A safe environment for everyone

Ottawa Wind Concerns

Tag Archives: South Branch wind farm

Wind power developer documents found lacking: engineers’ report

09 Wednesday Aug 2017

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

Brinston, EDP Renewables, electricity supply Ontario, environmental assessment, green energy, MInistry of the Environment and Climate Change, MOECC, Morrison Hershfield, Nation Rise wind farm, North Stormont Ontario, renewables, South Branch wind farm, wind farm, wind power

Power developer project documents are missing key details, engineering firm tells Municipality of North Stormont

Concerned Citizens of North Stormont leader Margaret Benke, in Finch, Ontario: MOECC has poor track record in meeting its responsibilities

August 9, 2017

Last week, Portugal-based EDP Renewables filed documents with the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) as part of the Renewable Energy Approval (REA) process, to get final approval for its “Nation Rise” wind power project in North Stormont, just south of Ottawa.

Using every tool they have to act responsibly on behalf of citizens, North Stormont had engaged Ottawa engineering firm Morrison Hershfield to conduct a review of the documents presented earlier.

The firm found that key information was missing from the project documents in critical areas such as the impact of the project on groundwater, and on bird and bat populations, to name two. An excerpt from the Morrison Hershfield report, tabled at a late June Council meeting, follows.

  • No review has been completed for potential impacts of the project on potable water sources. While potential impacts to groundwater resources have been reviewed from a biophysical perspective, no review has been completed to assess the potential impacts to groundwater resources from a potable water quantity and quality perspective.

• No review has been completed for potential impacts of the project on prime agricultural lands (Class 1-3 agricultural soils)

• Confirmation letter from the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport regarding completeness of archaeological and cultural heritage assessments has not been received for the project as described in clauses 22 (a) and 23 (3) (a) of Ontario Regulation 359/09;

• Confirmation letter from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry regarding completeness of natural heritage assessment and birds and bats EEMP has not been received for the project as described in clauses 28 (3) (b) and (c) of Ontario Regulation 359/09;

• Significant details are missing on the project description (e.g. location and type of permanent meteorological towers & location of the 2-3 proposed staging areas of 2-7 hectares each); and

• No detailed review has been completed to assess potential effects of the project construction on municipal infrastructure.

The consulting firm recommended to Council that North Stormont ask for these reports to be provided, including an assessment of impact on groundwater and municipal infrastructure such as roads.

Read the engineering firm report here.

There is no information on whether EDP complied with the request from North Stormont before filing project documents to be screened for “completeness” by the MOECC.

Citizens in the area are very concerned about the power project. Margaret Benke, a leader with Concerned Citizens of North Stormont, told Ottawa Wind Concerns “You can imagine that with 825 homes within 2km of one and up to 10 proposed turbines, and both Crysler and Finch villages within 3km of multiple turbines, we are bracing for the worst.

The group is especially concerned following release of a report by Wind Concerns Ontario in June, showing that the MOECC has failed to respond to thousands of reports of excessive noise from wind turbines.

“We have many apprehensive citizens,” Benke said. “Unless the MOECC changes its approach, we expect that we could be treated with the same lack of respect and consideration as the 3,200 other residents of Ontario who were largely ignored.  We will continue our fight to protect our rural citizens, who deserve equal respect as citizens.”

EDP also operates the South Branch wind power project in Brinston; it took over a year to file its required acoustic audit to demonstrate compliance with provincial noise regulations for wind turbines, but there is no report posted on the company’s website.

The Nation Rise project will be 100-megawatt capacity using 30-35 industrial-scale wind turbines; Ontario currently has a surplus of electrical power and is regularly selling off extra at below-market prices, and paying wind power generators not to produce in times of low demand and high supply.

A report published by the Council for Safe a& Reliable Energy noted that 70 percent of Ontario’s wind power is wasted. (Ontario’s High-Cost Millstone, June, 2017)

Wind turbines found to exceed legal noise levels

12 Wednesday Apr 2017

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Health, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Brinston wind farm, environmental impact wind farms, Goderich, health effects wind farm noise, infrasound wind turbines, K2 wind, low frequency noise wind turbines, MOECC, Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, renewable energy, Scott Miller CTV, South Branch wind farm, wind farm infrasound, wind farm noise, wind turbine noise

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change to conduct more tests on homes near Goderich; wind corporation says it is confident the power project is operating legally

April 11, 2017

CTV News London is reporting that several residents living near the K2 wind power project have received notification from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) that the turbines near their homes, and causing them to report excessive noise, are in fact out of compliance with provincial noise regulations for the power generating machines.

In the conclusion of the “Acoustic Recording Quantitative Screening Measurement Report” of testing performed by the MOECC recently, the MOECC states

… it is acknowledged that sound from the wind turbines was audible during the measuring campaign at levels that appear to exceed the applicable sound level limits, and based on C3 measurements conducted at a nearby receptor (the distance is about 1250 m from R876; where the same turbine(s) within 1500 m distance impact both receptors) it was further concluded that there is a possibility that sound from the nearby turbines could be tonal.

The use of the word “tonal” is key as the MOECC–and the wind power industry–have up to now refused to admit that the noise emissions from turbines are tonal, or producing vibration.

The complaints voiced by people living near turbines, however, seem to indicate that pressure or vibration is a key feature of the emissions being experienced.

See the CTV London video here:

http://london.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1098781&binId=1.1137796&playlistPageNum=1

K2 wind is located in Huron County and is operated by a consortium of Capital Power, Pattern Energy, Manulife, and the Alberta Teachers pension fund.

Residents near the South Branch project are reminded that they should report any adverse effects from wind turbine noise to the MOECC Spills Action Centre by calling 1-800-268-6060. Callers should provide their name and telephone number, location, location relative to the nearest wind turbines, direction of the wind and wind speed if available (this can be noted from weather data on your cellphone), and a rating of the noise/vibration on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the most severe.

Callers should be sure to get an INCIDENT REPORT reference number at the time of their call, and keep a record of their call(s) together with the reference numbers.

 

Wind power ‘tearing communities apart’ say farm owners

02 Wednesday Mar 2016

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Brinston, community opposition wind farms, Farmers Forum, leasing land for wind turbines, North Gower, South Branch wind farm, wind farm, wind power, wind turbines, windmills

Wind farms cause animosity in Ontario communities

3-MW wind turbine and house near Brinston: Ontario hasn't learned a thing. [Photo: Ray Pilon, Ottawa]
3-MW wind turbine and house near Brinston: communities “torn apart” by conflict. [Photo: Ray Pilon, Ottawa]

While the Wynne government claims to be “Building Ontario Up” the reality is different for rural communities where wind power developers offered leases to farmers, who then chose money over their neighbours and communityFarmers Forum, Eastern Ontario Edition, March 2016

TEARING US APART

Wounds not healing after wind turbines turned friends into bitter enemies

By Tom Collins

BRINSTON—Wind turbines tear apart communities and relationships, causing animosity that lingers for years, warn farmers who have lived through the ugly battles.

Don Winslow signed up almost immediately in 2013 when a wind company planned to build five turbines near Peterborough. Three months later, after immense public pressure and hostility, he couldn’t do it anymore.

“It relieved our stress tremendously [to cancel the contract],” the then-70-year-old Winslow told Farmers Forum after he cancelled his turbine. “We don’t have to sneak around the neighbours hoping not to run into them. There is always an element of society that is going to go overboard but people I respected were just as upset as the real radicals.”

There are only three wind turbine projects in Eastern Ontario – Brinston (10 turbines), Wolfe Island (86 turbines) and 5 turbines just west of Kingston, but there are more than 1,200 turbines in the province with another 1,500 on the way. The province is expected to announce new projects this month that could include another 98 turbines in Eastern and East-Central Ontario.

Most turbines are in Western Ontario where the stories are shocking.

They put their pocketbook ahead of the community

Time doesn’t heal all wounds, said Guelph-area dairy farmer Tim Martin. “There are people here that have absolute hatred for others. I have never seen anything so divisive in our community, ever, in my entire life. You try to say forgive and forget, but a lot of people say ‘We forgive them but we remember.’ They put their pocketbook ahead of our health and above the community’s well-being, and people don’t forget that.”

…

… But not everyone blames wind turbines. Some lay the blame on anti-wind protestors for stoking fears and fueling the fighting. Farmers with turbines have signed confidentiality agreements and won’t speak to news media. However, North Gower farmer Ed Schouten signed up for turbines on his dairy farm years ago but the project never went ahead. Although he is a strong supporter, Schouten said he would have to think long and hard about signing up again if the opportunity arose.

“You’ve got to be careful today because people are jealous and they’ll get back at you,” he said. “We have a lot to lose here. They can easily sabotage something on you. There’s all kinds of crazy people out there today.”*

Schouten credited anti-wind groups for doing a good job of fear-mongering and, while they are a minority, get people riled up.

The anti-wind protestors “say [turbines] tear up the communities. They’re the people that tore up the communities, not the turbines. They say [wind turbines] pit neighbor against neighbor and all this stuff because they want another reason to get rid of them.”

See an excerpt of this article here: Farmers ForumMarch2016-Tearing UsApart

To see the full article, go the FarmersForum.com next week or call 613-247-1334 to purchase a copy.

*Ottawa Wind Concerns Editor note: during the time of community action to oppose the proposed North Gower-Richmond wind power project, there was NEVER any threats of violence or civil disobedience. As to the comments about the opposition being a “minority,” readers will recall that a petition to the City of Ottawa requesting that North Gower be Not A Willing Host to the wind power project garnered signatures from 1,400 residents— almost every taxpayer in Ward 21. The petition was accepted and a motion of support passed unanimously at Ottawa City Council.

Turbines a concern in South Dundas; oil pipeline? Not so much.

14 Monday Dec 2015

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Brinston, community opposition wind farms, EDP Renewables, Energy East, Evonne Delegarde, Not a Willing host, South Branch wind farm, South Dundas, wind power Ontario

TransCanada Corp.’s 4,600-kilometre crude oil pipeline proposal aims to connect Hardisty, Alta. to a brand new export terminal in Saint John, N.B., connecting the oilsands to eastern refineries, and crossing hundreds of rural areas such as South Dundas along the route.

The Financial Post, December 14, 2015

BRINSTON, ONT. • Jason Cardinal fiddles with his baseball cap, leans back on the wall and mockingly counts his gripes with the latest energy project imposed on his eastern Ontario township.

“It’s an eyesore, it disturbs their cows, kills their birds and makes whistling sounds, blah, blah, blah,” he deadpans.

Cardinal lives near Brinston, a tiny agricultural community in the municipality of South Dundas roughly 70 kilometres south of Ottawa, where TransCanada Corp. last week hosted an open house for its proposed Energy East crude oil pipeline.

Cardinal and his friends Lloya Sprague and Mike Vanallen are more vocal about the wind turbines installed in the South Dundas municipality than the Energy East proposal. The 30-megawatt South Branch Wind Farm installed by Madrid-based EDP Renewables Canada Ltd., connected to utility distributor Hydro One, is part of Ontario government’s Green Energy Act plan to raise the contribution of renewable sources in the province’s energy mix.

The three firefighters serving the community were at the open house not representing the South Dundas fire department, but “were interested as a person” in the Energy East project, says Sprague.

But it’s not the $12 billion proposal to reverse the existing natural gas pipeline and convert it to take bitumen from Western Canada to East Coast that has Cardinal uneasy.

TransCanada Corp.’s 4,600-kilometre crude oil pipeline proposal aims to connect Hardisty, Alta. to a brand new export terminal in Saint John, N.B., connecting the oilsands to eastern refineries, and crossing hundreds of rural areas such as South Dundas along the route.

FP1212_Brinston_C_JR

The 1.1 million barrels per day project was submitted to the National Energy Board last year, but the Calgary-based company will file an amendment to the application before the end of the year after scrapping plans for a marine terminal in Quebec.

The plan involves repurposing an existing 3,000-kilometre natural gas pipeline that runs from Alberta to Ontario with the Iroquois pump station 12.4 kilometres from Brinston marking the end of that line. As such, most landowners along the line are already familiar with the concept of a fossil fuel conduit running through their backyards.

TransCanada has been holding these open houses across Canada since 2013, as part of it community engagement agenda, but not each event has gone as quietly as Brinston. TransCanada spokesman Tim Duboyce says there have been protests at some of the 116 open houses the company has hosted, while general protests have not been uncommon. In May, hundreds of people marched through Red Head, N.B. to protest the project that ends near that community. Montreal, Kenora and Thunder Bay have also seen protests against the pipeline over the past year.

Related

  • TransCanada is ‘confident’ Energy East will meet potential new requirements, but says costs will go up
  • America has built the equivalent of 10 Keystone pipelines since 2010 — and nobody said anything
  • TransCanada Corp suffers another setback as it scraps Quebec port for Energy East

But it’s hard to find any opposition on this night in Brinston.

Famous for Caldwell towels and Mcintosh apples in nearby Dundela, South Dundas is primarily a town focused on growing soyabean, corn and dairy farming, where residents are more likely to be rattled by solar farms and wind turbines.

South Dundas mayor Evonne Delegrade says she has heard “nothing” on Energy East from her 33 communities that make up the township of roughly 11,000 people. Indeed, the 24 or people who showed up last Monday evening, many with children in tow, were there mostly out of curiosity about, not in opposition to, the pipeline project.

In contrast, Delegrade got an earful from the community last year when 10 wind turbines were installed after approval from the provincial government.

“For the wind turbines, we are not a supporting municipality in that the majority of council did not agree with the Green Energy Act,” Delegrade said, noting that an expansion of the project was voted down by her council.

Once it’s done [with construction], you will never hear about it again

While the Ontario Ministry of Energy is supportive of wind projects, “that’s not happening, to my knowledge, with this (Energy East) project,” Mayor Delegarde says.

Ontarians are paying a price for the Ministry of Energy’s push for wind turbines and solar farm projects, she says. “And this (Energy East) isn’t going to nickel and dime or add any taxes to our residents.”

Indeed, the province has come under sharp criticism for its zeal in pursuing expensive renewable energy projects. In a report this month, the provincial auditor general estimated that the Liberal Government’s decision to ignore its own planning process would cost electricity customers as much as $9.2 billion more for new wind and solar projects.

The wind turbines looming large over the community is part of its problem, says Sprague, noting that in contrast Energy East would be “out of sight, out of mind.”

“Once it’s done [with construction], you will never hear about it again,” says Vanallen.

Dave Chan for National Post

[Dave Chan for National Post] A model of a pipeline construction on display in Brinston, Ont., one of the communities across Canada where TransCanada held information sessions on the Energy East pipeline for local residents.

The latest round of “safety and emergency response days” has taken TransCanada to Prairie cities and towns in Ontario and Quebec. More are planned in Quebec before the end of the year where TransCanada may find a more frosty reception. Unlike much of Ontario, Quebec towns will see new pipes being laid and farmers largely unaccustomed to dealing with pipeline companies. In November, Premier Philippe Couillard sounded an early alarm by noting that the scrapping off the Quebec marine terminal would “complicate” the project’s approval by the province.

To be sure, the criticism is not as vitriolic as it often was during TransCanada’s own Keystone XL pipeline and Enbridge Inc.’s Northern Gateway pipeline campaigns.

Indeed, last year, the Northwestern Ontario Municipalities Association (NOMA), comprising districts of Kenora, Rainy River and Thunder Bay that make up two-third of the province’s land mass, voted in support of the conversion of natural gas pipelines for the Energy East project.

Dave Chan for National Post

[Dave Chan for National Post]South Dundas mayor Evonne Delegarde.

“The majority of the community is fine with the conversion as long as the safeguards are put in place,” says David Canfield, mayor of Kenora and president of NOMA.

“But if they were trying to pull a wool over our eyes, as the saying goes, with Energy East, I will be the first one to come down on them,” Canfield adds. “So far they have been very open to our concerns.”

Fearing a repeat of a crude-laden train exploding as happened at Lac Megantic, Que., the municipality association’s largely symbolic vote was driven by a desire to rid the communities of 32,000 petroleum laden rail cars that regularly roll through the towns each year.

“Those tracks don’t bypass the communities — in most cases they go straight through,” said Iain Angus, a member of the Thunder Bay Council and member of NOMA council.

NOMA is also seeking assurances from TransCanada that the communities’ drinking water and hunting and recreational facilities will be protected.

“If things happen that we didn’t like, we would modify our position,” Angus said in a phone interview.

While the umbrella association is in agreement, the city of Thunder Bay, the most populous municipality in Northwestern Ontario, is divided on the project, with mayor Keith Hobbs “totally opposed” to the pipeline. Another council member was not convinced that the pipeline would reduce crude-by-rail traffic.

“At this juncture, [I’m] totally opposed to this pipeline,” Hobbs said in September, according to a CBC report. “Lake Superior, to me, is more important than any jobs. I want jobs in this city, but water comes first. Water is life.”

Dave Chan for National Post

[Dave Chan for National Post] Local residents of South Dundas look at a map of the region with TransCanada staff at an information session on the Energy East pipeline.

In September, the city council agreed to delay a vote on the pipeline after Angus — who supports Energy East — put forward a motion to defer it.

“The pipeline is 70 kilometres north of the city,” Angus says dryly. “It’s well outside of our municipal boundaries.”

Separately, a volunteer organization headed by Angus has launched an Energy East task force, seeking National Energy Board funding to do its own consultation with First Nations and the general public.

Awareness of the pipeline will likely rise among communities once the the review process gathers momentum, but for now visitors to Matilda Hall in Brinston are merely intrigued passers-by.

One man from Morrisburg, with a worn-out cap taming his long, graying hair, brought his three young daughters to the event. After spending about 20 minutes in the hall, he stepped out of the centre and lit a cigarette that he had rifled from a small ziploc bag.

A TransCanada employee started explaining the company’s spill response, and the man punctuated his response with a slightly bored “Is that right?” line. Did he get all his concerns addressed, he is asked. He sucks on his cigarette: “Yeah, I wasn’t concerned, just curious.”

yhussain@nationalpost.com
YAD_FPEnergy

Call to register wind turbine noise complaints

12 Thursday Nov 2015

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Health, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Brinston wind farm, Jim McDonell, MInistry of the Environment and Climate Change, noise report wind turbines, South Branch wind farm, wind farm noise, wind farm vibration, wind turbine noise, windmills Brinston

Wind turbine and home, Brinston, Ontario. Photo by Ray Pilon.

Wind turbine and home, Brinston, Ontario. Photo by Ray Pilon.

Residents of the Brinston area, living with the South Branch wind power project operated by EDP Renewables of Spain, are reminded to call with any complaints or problems with noise or vibration experienced.

People with complaints about excessive noise from the turbines at Brinston must call both the developer, EDP Renewables (1-877-910-3377 ext 3) AND the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change/MOECC (1-800-860-2760 Cornwall area office). 

It is recommended that you call and leave a message with the particulars of your complaint such as the time of day, the duration of the problem experienced, and your specific location.

You may wish to document events on your own: there are applications to measure noise and infrasound that are free downloads to your cellphone. Record noise events by date and time, the noise level you record, and also the wind speed at the time you make your notes.

Follow up your call to the MOECC with another call to determine what action has been taken.

Note that the wind “farm” operator was mandated to complete a post-operational noise assessment which to date, it has not been done. This means that the protections afforded Ontario residents under the Green Energy Act and regulation 359/09 may not be in place for South Branch area residents. If you are concerned about this contact your MPP Jim McDonell at jim.mcdonellco@pc.ola.org and the MOECC at https://www.ontario.ca/contact-us or1-800-565-4923

South Branch wind project a success says developer EDP

29 Friday May 2015

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Brinston, compliance noise regulations, EDP, EDP Renewables, Ken Little, Ministry of Environment Cornwall, noise complaint, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, power project, South Branch, South Branch wind farm, South Dundas, South Dundas Council, Spills Line reports Ontario, turbine noise complaints, wind farm noise complaints

Chris Little Thomas LoTurco EDP Renewables Apr2115 Edited

Ken Little (L) and Thomas LoTurco of EDP presenting to South Dundas Council in April: everything is tickety-boo.

EDP Renewables held one of its mandatory community liaison meetings last night, ironically in Dixon’s Corners where so many community meetings had been held by residents opposed to the project.

The wind power project is a great success declared project manager Ken Little. He dispelled concerns about the “charge of lease” issue*, and noise complaints, and insisted that the community is in favour and supportive of the power project.

The Ministry of the Environment representative from the Cornwall district office was also in attendance and admitted that the power developer has yet to file its mandatory noise testing report, as the required higher wind speeds have not been achieved. Therefore the Ministry does not have appropriate data and does not intend to pursue any enforcement action for non-compliance with the regulations.

No one actually measuring noise for compliance

This statement was a shock to those present who have lodged noise complaints (Ottawa Wind Concerns is aware that the first noise complaint was filed two weeks after the turbines began operating). People in at least one residence in Brinston lodged enough complaints that the Ministry conducted a noise audit on site—those results are not available to the public, the MoE representative said.

In the absence of an active community group in South Branch at present, Ottawa Wind Concerns will answer any questions as bet we can: ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

*Editor’s note: Mr Little is following the wind power lobby group guideline of claiming the charge of lease “issue” (where developers can obtain financing which is then registered on title) is simply a rumour, and is “nobody’s business.” The fact is, the charge of lease potential is yet another characteristic in wind power leases that land owners need to be aware of, and can affect their ability to obtain financing.

EDP Renewables bulldozes holdout landowner home

11 Monday May 2015

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Brinston, EDP, EDP Renewables, EDP Renewables North America, lawsuits wind farms, North Dundas Ontario, North Stormont, North Stormont Ontario, signing leases for wind farms, South Branch wind farm, Stormont-Dundas-Glengarry, Wind energy companies, wind farm, wind farm neighbours, wind farm property, wind turbines

 

 

Courthouse News Service, May 11, 2015

House Bulldozed for Wind Farm, Family Says
By REBEKAH KEARN

ShareThis

     LOS ANGELES (CN) – Wind energy companies bulldozed a black family’s house because they were the sole holdouts who refused to sell out to a huge wind farm, the family claims in court.
Darlene Dotson and her sons David and Daniel sued EDP Renewables North America, Horizon Wind Energy Co., Rising Tree Wind Farm, CVE Contracting Group, and Renewable Land LLC, on May 7 in Superior Court.
The family wastes no time in getting down to specifics. “Plaintiffs in this action are the victims of a multinational energy developer who refused to accept ‘No’ for an answer,” the 32-page complaint begins.
“The heart of the issue is that the Dotsons own property in Mojave that is sought after by EDP Renewables for windmills, and they refuse to sell,” the family’s attorney Morgan Stewart told Courthouse News.
Mojave, pop. 4,300, is 50 miles east of Bakersfield, below the Tehachapi Mountains, on the edge of the immense Mojave Desert.
“The home on the property was a family home they used for family vacations and gatherings. EDP pressured them to sell, but they still refused,” Stewart said.
“The house was damaged several times when they were away. And then one time when they went back to the house they found that it had been demolished, scraped to the foundations, along with all of their belongings. The companies did it.
“We see it as intentional because EDP needed the property for the wind farm, but the Dotsons wouldn’t sell,” Stewart said.
EDP Renewables is building the Rising Tree Wind Farm about 3 miles west of Mojave in Kern County.
Project leaders estimate the wind farm will generate 199 megawatts of electricity when it goes online sometime this year – enough to power around 60,000 homes and take 33,000 cars off the road.
The Dotsons say the defendants first approached them about the wind farm in 2009, claiming they needed to buy the surrounding parcels of land, including the Dotsons’ land, for the wind farm.
The Tehachapi Mountains, which top out at 7,992 feet, generate nearly constant winds, as the cool air on top and the Pacific Ocean to the west suck the superheated desert air through the mountain passes.
“Like the infamous Daniel Plainview from Paul Thomas Anderson’s Film, ‘There Will Be Blood,’ defendants held themselves out as friends to the local community and a source of prosperity for its residents. Among other things, defendants promised Mrs. Dotson and her neighbors that the wind farm would stimulate the local economy and generate energy revenue for cooperating landowners. All that Mrs. Dotson and her neighbors had to do was to sign over the rights to their homes,” the complaint states.
But Darlene Dotson says she resisted the sales pitch, telling the companies she was not interested in selling because her family “cherished” their home and its underlying history more than the companies’ offers of money.
“The house had been in their family for 20 years, and was one of the original homesteads built by African Americans in the early 20th century,” attorney Stewart said.
The Dotsons used the home for family gatherings, vacations, barbeques and birthday parties. Daniel and David Dotson grew up playing in the house and then took their own children to play there. It was “hallowed ground” to the family, according to the complaint.
In addition to memories, the house contained the Dotsons’ family mementos, including photographs of deceased family members, family heirlooms and antiques.
Though all of their neighbors agreed to sell or lease their land, the Dotsons held out and “respectfully declined” the companies’ numerous offers, according to the complaint.
When the companies realized the family was adamant about keeping their home, they became aggressive and hostile, the Dotsons say. Mrs. Dotson claims the companies’ agents insulted her and spoke to her disrespectfully, and told her that “the home was worthless and that the Dotsons should take the money because it was the best they would ever get for the land.”
They harassed her sons and tried to bully them into persuading her to sell the house by threatening to “surround the home on all sides with the wind farm, restricting the Dotson’s access to the home and causing the home’s property value to plummet,” the complaint states.
Stewart said the companies wanted the property so badly they approached the Dotsons’ neighbors and asked them how to persuade the Dotsons to sell.
Then the defendants vandalized the house, breaking windows and patio furniture, the Dotsons claim. “In essence, the Dotsons were being terrorized in their home,” the complaint states.
In February this year the defendants started demolishing the surrounding homes to develop the land for the wind farm.
When David Dotson went up to the family home in late March to do some maintenance, he discovered that the home was “literally wiped off the face of the Earth,” that all the furnishings and family belongings “were simply eviscerated,” the complaint states.
Stewart said the family is not sure exactly when the house was demolished, but suspects it was around the time the companies started knocking down the other homes.
The Dotsons say several people from the companies called and left messages admitting that they had demolished the Dotson’s home and insisting that it was a mistake.
But the Dotsons claim it was a deliberate ploy to make them sell their land.
“The pressure to sell from EDP, the strong-arm tactics leading up to the demolition, and coming along afterward and trying to buy again, all indicate that this was not an accident,” Stewart said. “This was an intentional act by a company that thought it could strong-arm these people.”
Though there is no direct evidence of racism, Stewart thinks the Dotsons’ race had something to do with it.
“They are the only African American family in the area, the only ones pressured very hard by the companies, and the only ones who had their house demolished when they refused to sell,” he said.
Stewart said it takes a deliberate effort to destroy a house because the gas and water must be turned off, among other things.
“It’s especially sad because they described how they built parts of the house with their own hands. It’s ugly,” he said.
Representatives with the companies did not reply to requests for comment.
The Dotsons seek punitive damages for trespass to land, violation of the Bane Civil Rights Act, intentional infliction of emotional distress, conversion, nuisance, unfair business practices and negligence.
Attorney Stewart is with Manly, Stewart & Finaldi, of Irvine.

[NOTE: EDP Renewables is the power developer proposing a 150-megawatt, 50-turbine wind power project in Stormont-Dundas-Glengarry, and currently operates the South Branch wind “farm” in Brinston, Ontario]

North Stormont wind farm info

08 Friday May 2015

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Brinston wind farm, EDP Renewables, EDPR, North Stormont wind farm, South Branch wind farm, wind farm North Dundas

Too late for a lot of people, this was the notice of last night’s EDP Renewables Open House in Crysler.

We present it now for the description of the project area.

EDP’s website has NO information on this project.

page-001

Farm owners’ property used as security for wind farm financing: what property owners need to know

07 Thursday May 2015

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Brinston, Garth Manning, K2, leasing land for wind turbines, Ontario, property values wind farm neighbours, South Branch wind farm, wind farm, wind farm financing, wind farm lawsuits, wind farm leases, wind power, wind turbines

 

Farm owners’ property as security for wind farm financing: what owners need to know

Wind developers can use farm leases as security for financing the power project
Wind developers can use farm leases as security for financing the power project

Ontario Farmer, May 5, 2015

by Garth Manning and Jane Wilson

It came as a surprise to many in Ontario when it was revealed that the multi-national power developers behind the K2 wind power generation project near Goderich had secured $1 B in financing, and that this arrangement is now registered on title for the 100 farm properties involved as lessors.

The arrangement is between K2 Wind Ontario Inc. and Mizuho Bank Ltd. Canada Branch. It secures a revolving credit facility of up to $1 billion at 25% on a number of items, including the contracts between landowners and K2 for land and road agreements with municipalities.

Another, smaller example has also come to light: a wind power project south of Ottawa in Eastern Ontario, where the five landowners leasing land for a 30-megawatt, 10-turbine project now have charges on their properties for $70 million.

Immediately, questions arise as to what would happen if the power developers were to default on their loans: would the lender then own the farm properties? How would that affect road use agreements with municipalities?

The fact is, this is a common practice. Property owners can refer to the leases imposed by the developers to review this potential situation, and many others that may affect operation and ownership of their land while leasing land for the power projects.

In an Invenergy standard contract, for example, is this clause: “In connection with the Lessee’s financing of the Project, the Lessee….is hereby given the right by the Lessor…to mortgage its interests in the Lease…and to assign this Lease, or any part of parts thereof, and any subleases as collateral security…”

The proper term for this is a “Charge of Lease” but may also be referred to as a “Demand Debenture.” What it means is, the present value of the wind power contract (i.e., the Feed In Tariff or FIT contract with the Ontario government) is greater than the present value of the lease amount. The difference between those two amounts is security for the loan to the power developer. It is a charge against all contracts favourable to the wind power developer, which may also include road use agreements.

It is like a line of credit for the developer and typically, advances against the amount are tied to certain milestones such as stages of construction.

The critical factor, however, is what it means for the lessors, in other words the farm owners who have leased their land for wind turbines, access roads, substations, transmission lines, etc. The importance lies not so much that the farmer lessors might on default lose their land (the farm land itself is not mortgaged, just the turbine contract on that land) but the damage it does to that property owner if he/she wants to sell, or to renew an existing mortgage, or place a new one, or in any way borrow money for which the lender would want security on his/her land.

Let’s assume a farm owner wants financing for farm operations or improvements. That might now pose difficulty: lenders do not like to be second in line, as they would be where a charge of lease is in place.

If the farm owner wishes to sell, similar difficulties arise: the lawyer for a purchaser in the case of an agreement to purchase will do a title search and discover the Charge of Lease on title, then immediately advise his or her client that the client is entitled to get out of the deal unless the registration of the Charge is removed from title. A purchaser is not expected to assume any risk of this nature.

In the case of renewing an existing mortgage or placing a new one, the lawyer for the bank or other lending institution would take the same position — no renewal or new mortgage unless the customer sees that the Charge disappears from title.

This is one of several important characteristics of signing a lease to have wind turbines, and needs to be thoroughly considered. Other legal issues to be carefully considered may include potential liability for the substantial cost of “decommissioning” turbines at the end of the lease, difficulty obtaining insurance on property with wind turbines, loss of autonomy over building on the property and carrying out regular farming practices, and, last, the potential for nuisance suits from neighbours affected by noise or property value loss.

Property owners should consult with a lawyer before signing any agreement.

Garth Manning is a retired lawyer and former president of the Ontario Bar Association, who lives in Prince Edward County. Jane Wilson is president of Wind Concerns Ontario; she lives in North Gower.

Wind farm still a concern in Ottawa

20 Wednesday Aug 2014

Posted by ottawawindconcerns in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Dan Scharf, EDP Renewables, municipal election Ontario, Ontario Power Authority, OPA, Ottawa wind concerns, Scott Moffatt, South Branch, South Branch wind farm, wind energy, wind farm, wind farm North Gower, wind farm Richmond

People attending a community meeting in North Gower last evening expressed continuing concern about the wind power project that was proposed in 2008 for North Gower-Richmond. The project application has been suspended pending a new application under the Request for Proposal process, which will open in a few weeks.

According to documents obtained by Ottawa Wind Concerns via the Freedom of Information process (thanks to donations from the community) the wind power developer Prowind, was informed of the application suspension in June, 2013, but advised to keep in touch with their contact at the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) about the new opportunity to apply. Prowind maintains a listing for the project on its website.

At that time, Prowind’s documents were “deemed complete” by the OPA, and the company was waiting for a connection to the grid, before the approval process could continue.

Prowind advised The Ottawa Citizen in August 2013, that the company would review the terms of the new process, and re-apply, if appropriate.

In October of 2013, a legal petition bearing more than 1,200 signatures from area residents was presented to the City of Ottawa; council passed a motion that recognized the petition and further, asked the province for a return of local land-use planning powers.

Statements to the effect that the project is now dead are not correct; the OPA has not yet defined its “community engagement” requirement under the new process.

Meanwhile, the OPA has designated Eastern Ontario as a “green light” area for wind power development.

It is expected that the wind power project will be an issue in the upcoming municipal election; incumbent councillor Scott Moffatt wrote a report on the project in last week’s Manotick Messenger, and candidate Dan Scharf has stated he is opposed to it.

The South Branch project, also developed by Prowind and sold to US-based EDP Renewables, has been operating south of Ottawa since March; the turbines are the first 3-megawatt power generators in Ontario.

Email us at ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com 

← Older posts

Recent Posts

  • Earth Day in North Stormont: industrialized turbine landscape
  • Nation Rise wind turbines change rural communities
  • Construction active at Nation Rise
  • How wind turbines scarred a landscape and harmed a community
  • Community concerns persist as Nation Rise project nears completion

Follow me on Twitter

My Tweets

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Tags

Bob Chiarelli electricity bills Ontario Green Energy Act IESO Ontario Parker Gallant wind farm wind farms wind power wind turbines

Contact us

PO Box 3 North Gower ON K0A 2T0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel

 
Loading Comments...
Comment
    ×
    Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
    To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy