Tag Archives: wind power

Prowind wind farm in Norwich appealed

23 Tuesday Jun 2015

Posted by in Health, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Prowind was the wind power developer based in Germany that had a proposal for the North Gower-Richmond area of Ottawa. The company failed to qualify for bids for new projects in 2015. Norwich Gazette, June 22, 2015

A local group is appealing the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change’s decision to issue a renewable energy approval for the Gunn’s Hill wind farm. East Oxford Community Alliance Inc., a group of local citizens that has opposed the project since its announcement, has challenged the approval, citing several points to demonstrate the project will cause serious harm to human health and plants, animals and the natural environment. The matter will now be heard in front of the Environmental Review Tribunal. The hearing is scheduled for June 29, 30, July 6 through 8, July 14 and 16. The location is Oxford Centre hall. Information posted to the provincial Environmental Registry states the Alliance is asking the Tribunal to revoke the decision to issue the REA. The Alliance’s grounds for the hearing, as outlined on the registry website, include impacts to human health, the project’s proximity to Curries Aerodrome and harm to local animals. “Industrial wind turbines are known to cause a range of serious health effects (e.g., sleep disturbance, headaches, tinnitus, ear pressure, dizziness, vertigo, nausea, visual blurring, irritability, depression, problems with learning and concentration, increased stress, memory and panic episodes) and further impacts arising from these impacts (e.g., increased morbidity and significant chronic disease) in approximately 5 per cent to 30 per cent of the population,” the appeal posting states, adding the health effects are more likely than not caused by exposure to infrasound, low frequency noise and visual impact. The appeal posting also claims the construction and operation of the project as proposed will result in interference with radar systems at London and Hamilton and thus affect the safety of aviation-related activity in the area. The project is also proposed for an area in close proximity to Curries Aerodrome, which would expose pilots to unsafe conditions and require them to adopt unsafe practices during takeoffs and landings. Another point of the appeal is the impact it could have on livestock health, reproduction or productivity, which would affect the livelihoods of farm operators. Prowind Canada’s Gunn’s Hill wind farm project received environmental approval from the MOECC April 9. At that time, Prowind Vice-President Juan Anderson said the company is prepared to follow the appeal process, but was confident in the process it followed to receive ministry approval.

Editor’s note: the community group found that there were numerous errors and omissions in Prowind’s submission to the Ministry of the Environment.

Power developer EDF claims to have signed leases for St Isidore wind project

22 Monday Jun 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

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

Ontario Farmer, June 16, 2015

Farmers signing up for St. Isidore wind power project

by Ian Cumming

[Excerpt]

A 10,000-acre windmill project is being proposed near St. Isidore in Prescott County with many farmers already having signed leases.*

The 150-megawatt project is projected to run from Highway 417 north to County Road 10 and 16 in the Nation township, states a press release from the St. Isidore Wind Energy Centre, and affiliate of EDF Renewable Services.

“There are supportive landowners in the area that have already signed up,” said David Thornotn from EDF. …

The St. Isidore Wind Energy Centre is holing an information meeting for the public on June 23rd from 5 to 8 PM in the St. Isidore Arena, said Thornton.

A Ponzi scheme: local farmer

“I have 700 acres right smack in the middle of it and I think the program is stupid,” said a farmer who wished to remain unidentified. “It’s a Ponzi scheme that in the end has you buying your own power. They’ve been phoning me for a couple of years now to sign, but I won’t,” said the farmer. “Others have probably signed up…they want the money now not realizing that in the end it will cost them.”

People who work at the power dam in Cornwall “tell me that you would cry when you see all the water that we dump over the dam because we don’t need the power,” said the farmer. “And when these things become obsolete the companies will be gone or bankrupt…You’re going to have to clean your own tower up.”

…Local landowner groups have become involved over the St. Isidore and other nearby proposed wind projects said Beth Trudeau from that organization.

Municipalities can take action

Their response to the project will focus on making municipal politicians aware of the fact that the Green Energy Act does not prohibit them from ruling as to whether or not the projects can be constructed, she said.

“The municipalities are saying there is nothing they can do, and we intend to show them otherwise,” said Trudeau.

*The wind power generators at the utility or industrial scale are NOT “windmills,” they are wind turbines. This should properly say the wind power developers is “alleged” to have signed agreements with farm owners as it is a common tactic for the developers to encourage people to sign by telling people many others already have; also, at this stage, the agreements are likely an “option” and not a contract.

 

Australian Senate report: dismayed by wind industry behaviour

19 Friday Jun 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

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

As you may know, the Senate in Australia (which is an elected body) has been conducting a review of wind turbines and problems associated with wind power generation in that country for several months.

Although the final report is not due out until August, the Committee felt it necessary to release an interim report and the “headline recommendations.”

They are very interesting…and refreshing in that here is a body that has listened to both sides, and has concluded there is cause for concern.

Of particular interest are these three paragraphs from the report.

Why are there so many people who live in close proximity to wind turbines complaining of similar physiological and psychological symptoms? As with previous Senate inquiries, this committee has gathered evidence from many submitters attributing symptoms of dizziness, nausea, migraines, high blood pressure, tinnitus, chronic sleep deprivation and depression to the operation of nearby wind turbines. The committee invites the public to read and consider the evidence of people who have experienced these symptoms and who attribute their anxiety and ill health to the operation of turbines.2

1.13 These health affects should not be trivialised or ignored. The committee was particularly distressed by renewable energy advocates, wind farm developers and operators, public officials and academics who publicly derided and sometimes lampooned local residents who were genuinely attempting to make known the adverse health effects they were suffering.

1.14 The committee is aware of people complaining of these impacts who have since left their family home. Some now live a nomadic and uncertain existence. In one case, the now deserted home had been in the family for five generations—since the 1840s. These are not decisions taken lightly. Having left the turbine vicinity, several witnesses noted that the symptoms had faded if not disappeared.3

The Committee quite rightly observed that the decision to leave the family home, and often hundreds of thousands of dollars of investment, to say nothing of farm operations and property, because they HAD TO.

The recommendations listed by the Senate Committee include the need for independent clinical research, and continuous independent monitoring of wind power project noise and infrasound (oh, and we need standards and regulations for infrasound–Ontario doesn’t have these and is dragging its feet on this issue)—the Committee also vindicated the effort and methodology of acoustician Stephen Cooper whose Cape Bridgeport study and finding of unique “sensation” resulting from the turbine emissions.

Several months ago, Ottawa Wind Concerns was subjected to a barrage of insulting Tweets one evening from Australia from a pro-wind power physician, and acolytes of sociologist Simon Chapman. Mr Chapman is mentioned specifically in the Senate Committee report, presumably as one of the disappointing “academics.” (Mr Chapman also functions as a paid consultant for the wind power industry.)

The commentators that evening included one Chris Young of Ottawa who works in the renewable energy field (former Board member of the Ontario Sustainable Energy Association, and former employee of NorSun Energy). Mr Young, at the end of a trail of increasingly insulting posts claiming that people who reported health effects from turbine audible noise and infrasound were essentially nuts, said that Ottawa Wind Concerns, people like us, and specifically me, were “irrelevant.”

Now that we have a government body stating that there is cause for concern, that the wind power industry’s behaviour has been lamentable, and that the way forward is research that is actually intended to find out what’s going on, we ask, who is “irrelevant” now?

Jane Wilson, RN

Chair, Ottawa Wind Concerns

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

P.S. The Ontario Sustainable Energy Association is supported significantly by taxpayers. See funding information here.

P.P.S. Mr Young now enjoys the position of being the only person blocked from our Twitter feed.

Community organizes to fight Land O’Lakes turbines

09 Tuesday Jun 2015

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

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

Significant scenic area of Ontario could be affected

Residents of North Frontenac and Addington Highlands (also known as Land O’ Lakes area) have organized to fight the threatened 150-turbine wind power development by NextEra.

NextEra is the renewable energy arm of the U.S. power company, Florida Light and Power. As Parker Gallant has revealed in a post on this site, FPL is doing so well scooping up subsidy money here in Ontario, they have actually provided rate reductions to their customers in the United States.

See the website for the Bon Echo Area Residents Against Turbines here. The website is under construction and promises more detail later, but features a petition for signing now.

Citizens recently held a community meeting in Denbigh that included presentations by Parker Gallant and Carmen Krogh.

The group also has a Twitter account bearatorg and Facebook page.

 

Bob Chiarelli cost you $135–and it’s going to get worse

27 Wednesday May 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

April 2015: surplus wind power costs Ontario millions

Energy Minister hiding his head over consumer losses due to surplus power, lots of it windEnergy Minister hiding his head over consumer losses due to surplus power, lots of it wind

Electricity exports cost heading for $2 billion in 2015

The continued costs to Ontario’s ratepayers for the oversupply of electricity generation in Ontario continued in April 2015; we exported another 2 terawatts (TWh) of power to our neighbours.  April’s exported TWh brings exports for the first four months of 2015 to 8.65 TWh — that’s enough to supply 900,000 average Ontario ratepayers with power for a full year.

Surplus exports represented over 19% of Ontario’s total demand for the month; that figure doesn’t include curtailed wind, steamed-off nuclear or spilled hydro.

The cost (Hourly Ontario Electricity Price + Global Adjustment) to ratepayers for exported power in April was $223 million. We sold it for 1.57 cents per kilowatt hour, thereby generating only $32 million. Ontario’s electricity ratepayers had to eat $191 million in losses that will find their way to the Global Adjustment pot and the “electricity” line on our bills.

As noted in a prior article, the first quarter of the current year generated losses (costs to ratepayers) of $437 million. So now, with the April figures, those costs to date are $608 million or $135 per ratepayer.

We still have eight months left in the year: at the current pace, our bill to support surplus exports will amount to over $400 for the average ratepayer.

Wind power generation for April represented 39% of the exported volume as it produced about 850,000 MWh (megawatt hours) at an average of $123.50 per/MWh, meaning its cost of $104 million represented almost 50% of total export costs.

Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli doesn’t seem to notice our growing surplus*; however, he has directed the IESO to acquire another 500 MW of renewable energy from wind and solar in 2015, and mandated conservation of another 7 TWh by 2020.

Time to stop digging the hole.

© Parker Gallant

May 27, 2015

The views expressed are those of the author and do not represent Wind Concerns Ontario policy.

 Editor’s note: speaking at a wind power information evening in Finch, Ontario, on May 6th, Ontario Federation of Agriculture president Don McCabe said there is no surplus of power in Ontario. This is a lot of lost power and a lot of losses to electricity consumers—including farmers—to deny.

South Dundas wind power plant target

26 Tuesday May 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

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

Not the photo the Standard-Freeholder used, of a turbine alone in a field. THIS is reality: a house and turbine near KIncardine, Ont.

Not the photo the Standard-Freeholder used, of a turbine alone in a field. THIS is reality: a house and turbine near KIncardine, Ont.

U.S.-based Invenergy is trying to persuade South Dundas to reverse its unwilling host resolution and put its stamp of approval on a proposal for more wind turbines for the area.

Cornwall Standard-Freeholder, May 25

South Dundas remains a magnet for wind power developers, despite an earlier proclamation the municipality is “not a willing host” for the controversial turbines.

Just on the heels of a presentation made by the township’s only resident turbine developer, EDP Renewables, a second firm wants in on the action. South Dundas council heard last Tuesday from James Murphy and Ryan Ralph, who were representing Invenergy, reputed to be the continent’s sixth-largest green energy entity.

Invenergy is proposing its Nine Mile Project, which would be considerably more ambitious the current South Branch project that is now operating in the Brinston area. It would also spill into North Dundas.

If developed, Nine Mile would produce between 50-90 megawatts/hr. South Branch delivers 30 megawatts, but EDP is hoping to expand its operations in the township.

Invenergy needs council’s blessing in order to arm itself with a best-case argument to get provincial approval as it competes with some 40 other companies. One of the requirements that South Dundas wants projects to satisfy is to show there is a demand for more electricity.

Invenergy has indicated by 2019, more energy will need to be produced in Ontario, reversing a current trend of selling power at loss to other jurisdictions.

Mayor Evonne Delegarde said the new council welcomes new presentations in order to analyze their individual worth.

One of the social spinoffs for hosting a turbine project is the community donations the township receives annually – $1,000 for every megawatt produced, so Nine Mile would provide $50,000 to $90,000 per year for 20 years.

As for her opinion, the mayor said the community investment would not be a factor in view of whether to accept the proposal. Several property owners have already signed up to receive $500,000 in lease payments if the project goes ahead.

twitter.com/GregPeerenboom

NOTE: Ottawa Wind Concerns has learned that a community group opposed to the wind power project may be forming in North Stormont–we will keep you informed.

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Social responsibility key in wind farm leasing decisions: Wind Concerns to OFA

19 Tuesday May 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

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

Clarify position on wind farms: WCO to OFA

Land owners need to be socially responsible when deciding to sign leases for wind turbines, Wind Concerns Ontario tells Ontario Federation of Agriculture president

The following is a letter sent by Wind Concerns Ontario president Jane Wilson to OFA president Don McCabe, in response to remarks made by Mr. McCabe at a wind farm information meeting in Finch, Ontario. Several of Mr. McCabe’s comments to the audience, such as that there is no surplus of power in Ontario, were not correct, WCO said in the letter.

As well, while Mr. McCabe’s advice to landowners to “get a lawyer” is sound, Wilson said, the attitude that landowners need to concentrate only on getting everything they want in a lease is isolationist and archaic, and is helping to divide Ontario’s rural and small-town communities.

“Not one word was said about responsibility to community, and neighbours. This [attitude] does not represent the view of the contemporary and socially responsible farm operators that we work with; they are professionals who believe they are part of their communities and who are aware of—or at least consider—the effects of their actions on others,” Wilson said.

The letter was sent to Mr. McCabe, and the Board of Directors for the Ontario Federation of Agriculture.

Print

Dear Mr. McCabe:

It was interesting to meet you last week in Finch, Ontario at the Lions’ Club event, where we both spoke, along with Mr. Levy of CanWEA.

I was relieved to hear your strong advice to those attending and contemplating signing a lease with a wind power developer, to “get a lawyer, get a lawyer, get a lawyer.” This is excellent advice: as you know, these contracts typically contain dozens of pages of various clauses outlining requirements and limitations…many people do not understand what they are being asked to sign.

I was disappointed, however, in other aspects of your presentation. First, there were a couple of statements made that are not correct and may even be misleading.

Power surplus in Ontario: in my presentation I had suggested that more wind power projects were not necessary, especially not for a form of power generation that is intermittent, produced out-of-phase with demand and is expensive, causing Ontario electricity rates to rise. You countered by saying that Ontario has no surplus of power. This is not correct: the Ontario Energy Minister himself admits that Ontario has surplus power and also says that the province will have a surplus for years to come. See his quotes and the forecast for power rates in a Globe and Mail article here.

“Net metering”: you told the audience that they should arrange in their lease to share in the wind power produced by any turbines on their land. This is not correct—it is unlikely one could get power from the wind turbine on a farm, and moreover, it would be in violation of the contract the wind power developer has with the Ontario government to obtain the Feed In Tariff to do that.

Turbine noise: you suggested to the audience that if the noise from turbines were to bother them, they could make sure that there is a clause in the lease so that the power developer would have to address that. This is extremely unlikely; at present, there are thousands of noise complaints in Ontario that go unresolved by either the developer or the Ministry of the Environment.

Community input to power projects: In response to several questions from the floor, you did advise people to go to the government website on the new Large Renewable Power Request for Proposal process, but you also suggested to at least one audience member that there is nothing communities can do, if a power proposal comes forward. That is not correct: people can work with their municipal governments, members of their community, and also choose not to sign the agreement required of adjacent property owners.

Contracts: I believe you also suggested to a farm owner who had signed a contract/option and was now having second thoughts that there was nothing he could do. This also is not correct, and would have been another opportunity for you to advise him to “get a lawyer, get a lawyer, get a lawyer.”

That brings me to the second area of disappointment in your presentation: the overarching theme of your remarks was that if people are going to sign a lease for a wind turbine project they should make certain that they get concessions from the power developer that benefit them. There was not a single mention in your remarks of the need for responsible consideration of other members of one’s community, including fellow farm operators, and neighbours.

This was a very narrow view that demonstrates no balance and instead indicates an archaic, “I can do whatever I want on my land” view. This does not represent the view of the contemporary and socially responsible farm operators that we work with; they are professionals who believe they are part of their communities and who are aware of—or at least consider—the effects of their actions on others.

Our concern with this isolationist view of farm ownership is that it will further divide Ontario’s rural and small-town communities.

OFA needs to clarify its position on this matter, and further, consider advising your membership that when it comes to deciding whether to participate in a wind power project, the responsible course of action is to balance their financial opportunities with the economic, health and social needs of others around them.

We would be pleased to meet with the OFA Board to discuss our concerns.

Thank you very much.

Jane Wilson

President

Wind Concerns Ontario

Proof of health problems from wind turbine noise, say public health doctors

11 Monday May 2015

Posted by in Health, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

Drs Ian Arra and Hazel Lynn, together with several associates, have now published a peer-reviewed article based on their literature review of studies on wind turbine noise and health impacts.

Their conclusion: we have demonstrated the presence of reasonable evidence (Level Four and Five) that an association exists between wind turbines and distress in humans. The existence of a dose-response relationship (between distance from wind turbines and distress) and the consistency of association across studies found in the scientific literature argues for the credibility of this association.

Read the complete article here.

The wind power development lobby insists there is not relationship between wind turbine noise, inaudible noise/low-frequency noise/infrasound, and often implies that people who claim such effects are actually ill-informed or not receiving money. A spokesperson for the Ontario Federation of Agriculture told an audience at this year’s Rural Ontario Municipalities Association meeting that anyone claiming to experience health impacts from turbine noise had questionable mental health stability and that the listener should “just cough on them.” His remarks were withdrawn by the OFA with an apology shortly thereafter.

Take the poll on green energy

08 Friday May 2015

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

Eastern Agri-Business News is running a poll, asking whether you think “green” energy sources will be enough to power Ontario, and at an affordable price.

Take the poll here: http://www.agrinewsinteractive.com/poll_update.htm

We take this opportunity to add that more than 80% of Ontario’s power already comes from emissions-free hydro and nuclear.

 

MPP Jim McDonell launches wind farm petition

08 Friday May 2015

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

A photo on Flickr

MPP for Stormont-Dundas-South Glengarry Jim McDonell has launched a petition asking to Ontario government to return full consultation for the community regarding a proposed 30-50 turbine wind power project, and further, to do a complete study of any impacts of the proposed power project.

The petition MUST be printed out, signed, and mailed or delivered to Mr McDonell’s office as a legal document. Fax or scanned versions are not legal.

Obtain the petition here: Petition

Contact Mr McDonell’s office at 613-933-6513 or visit his website at: http://jimmcdonellmpp.ca/