Tag Archives: wind turbines

Eastern Ontario wind farms: no community support

08 Saturday Aug 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

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

Eastern Ontario wind farms: “enjoy the horizon while you still can”

 From Farmers Forum, August 4, 2015

Community opposition to industrial-scale wind power mounting

Excerpt from “Eastern Limits” by Tom Van Dusen

I’m not sure what it is about North Stormont Township but wind power developers seem to love it.

Their calculations must have discovered more forceful winds than normal stirring the township. On the surface, though it seems no more or less windy than any other rural municipality.

In increasing numbers, developers have been wafting through the township looking for prime sites* to erect their industrial turbines. As in other communities where they’ve landed, their efforts have been the subject of increasing protests, petitions, and testy meetings.

Correctly gauging the way the wind is blowing on the issue, township council has just taken a stand against turbines and their proponents…for what that’s worth. With the provincial government relentlessly pushing wind power, it’s probably not worth much.**

Mayor Dennis Fife has explained that too many ratepayers are against wind projects for council to reasonably support them. Fife has expressed his personal opposition, claiming wind will never match nuclear power generation.

Typical of disgruntled ratepayers is Roger Villeneuve who worries that towers “much taller than any tree I’ve ever seen or will ever see” will soon dominate the local landscape.

…Council was helped along in its decision by Concerned Citizens of North Stormont which circulated an unwilling host petition, demanding that elected representatives back it at a meeting July 28. They did.

In explaining its opposition the citizens’ committee cited the loss of property values and prime agricultural land, increased hydro costs to cover wind power expansion, environmental impact on birds and bats, health issues related to pulsating noise and shadow flicker, and eventual decommissioning costs.

…Developers have been through all this before, in several other Ontario municipalities where they’ve landed. You see, they have carte blanche from the province under the Green Energy Act, trumping any local motions, opposing them. Projects are decided by the province’s Independent Electricity Service Operator [sic–it is “System” Operator] (IESO) with little regard for local concerns.***

…a growing number of wind power opponents are urging councils to use other tools at their disposal…one suggested option is refusing a bylaw to permit road access to turbine sites. ****

…

“Enjoy the natural horizon while there still is one,” says ratepayer Roger Villeneuve.

Wind Concerns Ontario notes:

* What they are looking for is willing landowners. Wind doesn’t really have much to do with it.

** The Not A Willing Host declaration stems directly from a statement by Premier Kathleen Wynne that she wouldn’t force wind power projects on communities that weren’t willing. Her failure to honour her word is underscored by the 89 (soon to be 90?) communities that have protested by municipal resolutions.

*** This is true but the failure of a developer to gain municipal support does not help them in a successful bid. Bids without community support are ranked lower.

**** This is not actually a valid option: several communities have tried this already and what happens is, the developer goes to the Ontario Energy Board which then grants permission to use road allowances. The municipality is then left without a road use agreement and possibility of compensation for the sometimes considerable damage to public roads.

South Dundas wind farm meeting draws mixed reaction

06 Thursday Aug 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Cornwall News Watch, August 6, 2015

South Dundas wind farm meeting brings large crowd, mixed views

Posted on August 6, 2015 by in News, South Dundas // 2 Comments

Wind turbines of the EDP Renewables’ South Branch Wind Farm, east of County Road 16, turn in a summer breeze on Aug. 5, 2015. The company is proposing another farm east of here that could cover approximately 10,000 acres. (Cornwall Newswatch/Bill Kingston)

DIXONS CORNERS – A big crowd had mixed feelings over a proposed second installment of a wind farm in South Dundas.

Roughly 70 people were at the Matilda Hall on County Road 16 Wednesday night to see various charts and talk with representatives about the South Branch Wind Farm II project as part of a three-hour open house.

The 75 megawatt wind farm would be nearly three times the size in area than the existing South Branch Wind Farm (it would be roughly 10,000 acres) and would have 20-30 turbines to the east of the existing wind farm.

The now-operating South Branch Wind Farm is 30 megawatts and has 10 turbines.

The Spain-based company, EDP Renewables, is among 21 qualified companies in Ontario to put together competitive bids for wind farms and are holding these open houses as part of their requirements to submit a bid.

While Morrisburg residents Dick and Doreen Liberty are generally not supportive of wind energy, they felt EDP Renewables put a good case together.

Uncertainties about health

“I think that there’s probably a reason to have wind but I’m still, like everyone else, somewhat skeptical about the fact that there’s some uncertainties. For example, the cows, is this affecting them? Still born calves, milk production and so on and (health effects) in humans as well,” Dick Liberty told Cornwall Newswatch.

Doreen Liberty said they came to “get educated” because it’s hard to make an informed opinion without the information.

“By looking at some of the charts I would say the province has a pretty good handle on what they’re doing and they have to jump through several hoops to get to the final points,” Dick Liberty said. “I’m somewhat impressed.”

EDP Renewables has to submit its proposal by Sept. 1 and its hoping to get council support by resolution Tuesday night, which would give it a competitive advantage.

With the exception of Coun. Archie Mellan, the entire council also showed up at the open house. MPP Jim McDonell was there as well.

South Dundas councillors and staff, spokesmen from EDP Renewables and local residents chat about the proposed South Branch Wind Farm II project during an open house Aug. 5, 2015 at Matilda Hall in Dixons Corners. (Cornwall Newswatch/Bill Kingston)

“I’m not surprised at what I’m hearing,” South Dundas Mayor Evonne Delegarde said after mingling with constituents. “The people who are involved or potentially involved in the project are supportive and the people who are not, are not supportive,” she said. The mayor said the biggest concerns she heard were about turbine noise, setbacks and the coverage area.

“Your head and your heart have to come into play on this one,” Mayor Delegarde stated when asked about balancing the concerns of constituents before Tuesday’s vote. “You know all the people…I have friends on both sides. I’ve received (dozens) of emails from both sides,” she said.

Bill Lortie moved into a home on Chess Road, a couple kilometers outside the proposed area for the wind turbines, about a year ago.

Larger than we thought

“The scope of it is larger than what we expected. The size of the turbines are larger, the number of turbines is greater that what’s currently in the ground there. It’s closer to our residence than we expected,” Lortie said.

Lortie seemed somewhat relieved that it wouldn’t have a direct impact on their home.

“Generally, we were impressed with the presentation. We’ll just have to take a ‘wait and see’ approach to where things go,” he said. “The bottom line is they’re an energy company. They’re in to make a profit, obviously. It’s a bit of a concern if these things start spreading all over,” Lortie said.

“It’s green energy as opposed to gas and oil and coal. Obviously it’s the direction in which we’re all heading and one of these days there will be wind farms all over the place and probably people won’t think twice about it,” he said. “It’s new now and people are rebelling, especially (over) the sound impacts and possible other environmental impacts.”

Another public meeting is happening in Finch Thursday from 5 p.m. until 8 p.m. at the Finch Community Arena at 4 John Street for EDP’s 100 megawatt Nation Rise Wind Farm.

Photos show wind farm devastation of Algoma

30 Thursday Jul 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Wind Concerns Ontario, July 30, 2015

Toronto photographer documents wind farm destruction in Ontario’s North

Wind is green, wind is good: photo shows blasting for access roads and turbine foundations in Algoma Highlands Photo: Gord Benner
Wind is green, wind is good: photo shows blasting for access roads and turbine foundations in Algoma Highlands Photo: Gord Benner

Toronto area resident and photographer Gord Benner took a circle tour of Lake Superior this summer and was astonished to see the damage being done by wind “farm” construction in Ontario’s formerly pristine North, especially the iconic Algoma region which was so often the subject of paintings done by the Group of Seven. The Algoma region attracts visitors from around the world.

Today, Benner says, they will see roads and transmission lines, and turbines to generate power where before there was Nature.

Benner writes:

“We started the Lake Superior Circle Tour at Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan and proceeded clockwise through Wisconsin and Minnesota. Didn’t see any wind turbines until after we entered Ontario. The IWTs [industrial wind turbines] installed near Dorion were not visible from the highway, but sure enough, there they were along the most scenic section of the Trans Canada Highway 17, from Lake Superior Provincial Park south to Sault Ste. Marie. Cottages and camps that we visited at Bow, Negick and Trim Lakes were surrounded by these huge machines.

“Sadly, nature, tourism and Group of Seven landscapes are taking a real beating.”

With woodlands cut away, and hilltops blasted flat, the damage caused by wind “farm” construction will be irreversible.

windconcerns@gmail.com

Huge turbines dwarf the landscape; here, a truck travels over a new road built for the power project in Algoma
Huge turbines dwarf the landscape; here, a truck travels over a new road built for the power project in Algoma

 

Money lures Nation Twp farmers to lease land for wind turbines

30 Tuesday Jun 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

“If I didn’t sign, I would see the windmills without revenue”: cash crop farmer Marc Bercier

Not too many years ago, cash cropper and seed grower/processor Marc Bercier was actively opposed to green energy projects being proposed and built in his area, but this February he signed for a potential five windmills* and one substation to be located on his 1,700 acres.

“If I didn’t sign I would see the windmills without revenue,” said Bercier.

Pointing to the 29 pages of documentation involved for his portion of the 10,000-acre proposed windmill project, Bercier noted how the negotiated sections on soil compaction, erosion and overall environmental protection were vital to him, considering that his farm is only just over the requires 500 meters from this village. [Editor: what? Do you mean from the project?]

The documentation showed that Bercier was promised $15,000 per windmill per year as a base price, with incentives for more power and compensation for anything that affected the surrounding land. The substation lease was $20,000 per year.

Township Council passed support motion

It’s a massive community project that seems to have the support of Nation Township Mayor Francois St. Amour. A January 20, 2014 council motion passed, stating it [council] “supports the application under the Ontario Power Authority’s Large Renewable Procurement Program.”

… Ontario Farmer obtained documentation showing that, as of March, 2015, 165 landowners had been approached by the EWG windmill company, of which 128 had signed agreements and 37 were in discussion.

“They are all farmers,” said St. Amour, noting that the required setback distances from the windmills meant that a lot of land was involved per windmill.

As of mid-June, almost everyone of the former holdouts had signed up and joined, said Bercier.

OFA ‘incredibly helpful’

The company had persuaded and signed up a local, prominent farmer who then went up and down the concessions promoting the project to individuals, said Bercier.

… “yes, there are liens on the project,” said Bercier. However all lien documentation has been passed by his lawyer, alleviating all concerns as to affecting the farming operation, he said.

The OFA has been incredibly helpful in promoting the project, noted Bercier.

Spending $42,000 a year of hydro costs for his farm, “double what it would cost if I was in Quebec,” Bercier is well aware of the extra hydro costs the public pay to finance such green energy projects.

“We had an election, the Liberals won. The voters chose to pay for more electricity,” said Bercier.

By Ian Cumming

Ontario Farmer

June 23, 2015

*They’re NOT “windmills”!

EDF wind power project map: St Bernardin to Casselman

25 Thursday Jun 2015

Posted by in Ottawa

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Wind power developer EDF revealed its project area map online and at the Open House held on June 23rd.

These maps do NOT represent lands actually under signed options, but indicate the area in which company representatives are looking for landowners to sign up to lease land for a future wind power development.

Landowners are advised to read all material related to leasing land for wind turbines, beyond what the wind developer may supply, and to consult a lawyer before signing ANY agreement.

The map is available here.

Health impacts of wind turbine noise, infrasound a public health concern: Carmen Krogh at ideacity

19 Friday Jun 2015

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Health researcher Carmen Krogh was a guest speaker at this year’s ideacity event in Toronto. No matter where in the world industrial-scale wind turbines have been installed, she said, the constellation of symptoms is the same.

This has become a world public health concern.

Take 20 minutes, please, to view this presentation, and ask yourself about the role of the Government of Canada in this, as the wind power industry leads the government down the renewable energy “roadmap” using taxpayer dollars. It is time the government sponsor proper, independent research that really wants to find an answer, not promote the industry on the untested promise of green energy and jobs.

View her excellent presentation here.

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.

Property in Addington Highlands? Read this ASAP

17 Wednesday Jun 2015

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

June 17, 2015

Addington Highlands’ Council voted this week to survey residents on the proposed wind power development that could see 100 or more industrial-scale, or utility-scale wind turbines throughout the area.

If you own property in Addington Highlands, you are eligible to participate and should do so immediately.

Go to: http://www.addingtonhighlands.ca/

For general information on the wind power proposals in the Land O Lakes area, you may wish to join the email list at Bon Echo Area Residents Against Turbines at www.bearat.org

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