Tag Archives: wind turbines

Treat wind turbines as industrial land use in creating new zoning bylaws, community group says

18 Tuesday Apr 2023

Posted by in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

April 18, 2023

Wind turbines create environmental noise and pose risks to safety, wildlife, and our water supply. New bylaws must protect people and the environment, says Ottawa Wind Concerns.

The City of Ottawa is in the process of developing new zoning bylaws as a follow-up to approval of the city’s new Official Plan.

As the Official Plan allows for renewable energy (power) projects to be built on

  • “Rural Countryside”
  • Greenbelt and Greenbelt Facility
  • Environmental lands.

it will be important to have appropriate and effective protective zoning bylaws, especially for the residents of rural Ottawa who will likely be living near any sort of power generation or storage project.

The City has posted a series of Discussion Papers and is accepting comments on these documents; there are surveys available for each of the six Discussion Papers but the open-ended comment portion accepts only a limited number of characters as a response.

Ottawa Wind Concerns has filed a comment with the new zoning team at the City. Here are a few of our comments.

On the Equity, Diversion and Inclusion paper, we wrote:

The expressed goal is to discuss “tradeoffs and compromises between competing goals and interests in the hopes of producing a safe, functional and liveable city for everyone.”

The City’s goal of generating power from “renewable” sources includes large-scale wind power projects according to the Energy Evolution document. That will result in industrialization of rural communities, with significant impact on the quality of life including the danger to aquifers, the introduction of noise pollution to the environment, and the reduction of property values which will affect the economic well-being of residents. In short, large-scale wind power development will work against the goal of “environmental health equity”, as described on page 1 of this paper.

Separation distances are mentioned in the paper (page 5) as a way to “prohibit land uses within a certain distance of each other.” The examples mentioned however are “group homes” and shelters. Again, any sort of power generation will be an industrial land use, and in the case of larger scale development will almost certainly be located in the rural areas. For wind turbines in particular, noise emissions and vibration/sound pressure have been demonstrated around the world as a serious impact on people forced to live nearby. Not only do the turbines create noise emissions, but so does power infrastructure such as transformer substations, which can emit harmful low frequency noise or infrasound. Solar power installations have similar infrastructure that can produce noise pollution, as do Battery Energy Storage Systems or BESS, which emit noise, and represent other risks such as fire.

Noted U.S. acoustics expert Robert Rand has said,

“Unlike other power plant technologies which have numerous noise control options, the only reliable noise control for wind turbines is distance.” —Robert Rand, Health Impacts of Industrial Wind Turbines, presentation September 10, 2019.

The setback distances in Ontario in effect today were created prior to widespread wind power development in 2009 and are widely regarded as inadequate. They are not supported by current scientific literature, nor do they align with the trend among many jurisdictions, particularly in the U.S. to establish greater setback distances for health and safety.

Ottawa Wind Concerns has already recommended a setback distance of 2 km between wind turbine zones and residential areas. Acoustician Robert Rand, quoted above, says the 2-km setback is a “reasonable compromise.”

“It isn’t hard to design facilities to be good acoustic neighbours,” Rand says.

Interestingly, the detailed discussion of “pollution” occurs not in the paper on public health but in the Equity paper. We noted:

While this area of the paper focuses on traffic and pollution, the city policy of promoting power generation from “renewable” sources such as wind and solar also represents a risk of pollution, specifically noise pollution. There are many documents supporting this including the Health Canada wind turbine noise study, and the Council of Canadian Academies report, “Understanding the evidence”.

Canadian researchers examined the public health approach to wind turbine noise and concluded:

“Based on our analysis of clinical, biological, and experimental evidence and its concordance with the nine BH criteria, we conclude that there is a high probability that emissions from IWTs, including infrasound and LFN, result in serious harm to health in susceptible individuals living and/or working in their proximity. These effects can be attributed to IWTrelated events such as recurring sleep disturbance, anxiety and stress, and likely others.”

They called upon public health authorities to take a precautionary approach to preventing adverse health effects, and act now:

“With the growing weight of evidence indicating this causation and the rapid proliferation of IWT installations globally, preventative actions should be taken, and policies implemented that are more cautiously protective of public health, safety, and welfare rather than wait for absolute certainty. … Our findings provide compelling evidence that there is a pressing need for risk assessment before deployment of IWT into rural community settings that consider more effective and precautionary setback distances. A margin of safety sufficient to prevent pathogenic LFN from being detected by the human vestibular system is paramount before proceeding with political or economic policies.”

While the introduction of noise to the environment is a serious and likely impact, one that will affect public health, there is another issue: safety. Grid-scale wind turbines operate under enormous stresses; around the world the number of “catastrophic failures” of wind turbines is rising. Some blame poor workmanship, or too speedy installation—whatever the cause, it will be important to have setbacks that ensure safety for people on public lands and roadways. The current setbacks, established in 2009, are not adequate.

Another Discussion Paper is devoted to Land Use Strategy. Our comment:

Our only comment here is that among the land uses listed on page 1, under “Industrial land uses”, power generation is not mentioned. When the city is planning massive power generation development as per Energy Evolution (page 45), such as 36 sq km of solar panels, 3200 megawatts or 700+ wind turbines (each turbine requiring as much as 5 acres of land), and 122 shipping container-sized battery storage systems, that is a significant industrial land use.

The amount of land needed for this adventure appears not to have been considered; it is certainly not discussed. World renowned environmental and energy expert Canadian professor Vaclav Smil noted in his book Power Density that industrial-scale wind is a low-density power source with several negative characteristics including the need for a lot of land: “disfiguration of landscapes is not the only consequence of the limited power densities of wind power. The need to install large numbers of machines tends to reduce the width of noise exclusion corridors, to increase the chances of large-scale bird fatalities, and to affect many terrestrial species as a consequence of the fragmentation of their habitat. In windy and sparsely populated Scotland, the rule is to allow 2 km between wind farms and the edge of cities and villages”.

Smil’s discussion of power density brings up another point: Ottawa’s insistence on wind and solar, both acknowledged intermittent power sources, is not based on any comparative analysis of power generation technologies. Wind power is a low density power source, i.e., it needs a lot of land to produce a small amount of power. Capacity is another concern; wind turbines do not generate power 100 percent of the time. Often we hear wind power developers boast that a wind power project will power X thousands of homes, when the truthful version of that statement would add, “30 percent of the time.”

Similarly, we try to make the point that any kind of power generation is in fact an industrial use of the land. So, in response to the paper on Neighbourhood Character, we made the following comment.

This Discussion Paper deals with building height and type of structures such as low-, mid-rise, and high-rise buildings but nothing approaches what would be happening to Ottawa’s rural villages and homeowners, should grid-scale or industrial-scale wind turbines be installed.

The impact is so severe that property value loss is a significant concern. Some studies have shown that property value loss in other areas of Ontario where wind turbines were built was as much as 50 percent or, in worst cases, house did not sell at all, indicating they had literally no value to prospective buyers in an open market.

When a wind power project was being contemplated nearby, the Town of Henderson NY contracted with Nanos Research and Clarkson University to do a study on the impact on property values. The study states:

“We see that parcels with a view of the turbines sell for a positive premium (approximately 10%) before the turbines are built, but that this premium is more than eroded by a strong negative impact after turbine construction. 

The estimated coefficient of -0.164 that describes this effect implies a 15% decrease in property values for homes with a view after the turbines are built. We also calculate a 95% confidence interval for this effect, which tells us that, given the observed data, there is a 95% chance that the true effect is a decrease of between 5.1% and 23.9%.

So, while we can’t be confident that the effect is exactly negative 15%, we are reasonably confident that there was a negative impact.”

We must ask, what homeowner can tolerate a drop of more than 20 percent in the value of their home? Particularly for young families already struggling with the cost of home ownership, or people on fixed incomes who are relying on the value of their homes to support them in later years? What kind of zoning bylaw policy proceeds with this type of dramatic economic impact?

In response to the Rural Zoning Issues paper, we again focus on the nature of land use, and also refer to the potential for effects on groundwater.

The paper also refers to the Energy Evolution plan, and states that “Renewable electricity projects will need to contribute an estimated 8.5% of our electricity sources in Ottawa” (page 6). There is no reference provided for this figure, and to the best of our knowledge, the 8.5 percent figure does not appear in the public Energy Evolution document. Where did that come from? What is the basis for this “requirement”? Is there any input from Hydro Ottawa or Hydro One?

Another statement is puzzling: “Local energy production and storage … can help reduce the impact of power outages from the large producers, which are occurring more frequently due to more extreme weather events.” With all due respect, this is preposterous. When there are “weather events” such as freezing rain or tornadoes or whatever, the power from “large producers” such as Ontario’s nuclear power generating stations or hydro facilities is not absent—it simply cannot be transmitted because of problems with the transmission system, usually, broken or downed power lines.

Under Environmental Protection is a brief discussion of the need for protection of natural environment areas and wetlands, and a previous paragraph deals with surface water. The risk to aquifers is not mentioned anywhere yet this is a major concern whenever wind and solar power projects are proposed. The foundations for wind turbines are huge, as you can imagine for 60-storey, vibrating structures. The risk to aquifers has been the subject of appeals of other wind power project approvals, notably the Nation Rise project south of Ottawa, which is located on a provincially designated fragile aquifer. In the North Kent area of Ontario, a wind power project proceeded over citizen concerns and today, dozens of families are without potable water. A provincial health review study found that there was a link to the construction and operation of the wind turbines on the fragile aquifer, and more study is currently underway.

The Ontario Ground Water Association has expressed concern about wind turbines and put out this statement: “Proper environmental analysis is necessary before choosing an appropriate location for wind turbines to ensure there’s no impact on #groundwater resources.”

The comment was filed with the engagement team at newzoning@ottawa.ca

While citizens can use the surveys attached to each grouping of Discussion Papers, people might want to create their own, longer comments and file them, using the email referenced above.

Sign the petition

Ottawa Wind Concerns has also launched a petition to formally ask for a 2-km setback for wind turbines and homes. You may download it here: Petition

You can fold it into a mailer and send to: Wind Concerns, PO Box 91047 RPO SIGNATURE CTR  KANATA ON  K2T 0A3

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Rural Issues and new City bylaws: citizens need to comment, says Ottawa Wind Concerns

12 Wednesday Apr 2023

Posted by in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, ,

The City’s “engagement” process can only work if people know about the Discussion Papers, and take advantage of opportunities to comment

Renewable energy development will be permitted in “Rural Countryside” and greenbelt. What does that mean? [Photo: Dorothea Larsen]

April 12, 2023

Are you OK with renewable energy facilities, including wind turbines, solar “farms” and battery storage systems, being built in Ottawa on “Rural Countryside” and greenbelt land?

Are you OK with every interchange on the 416 or 417 in Ottawa being rezoned to accept “industrial” and “logistics” (trucking distribution centres) buildings?

These are just two of the ideas in the City of Ottawa’s background documents or “Discussion Papers” that have been released for public engagement, while City staff write new zoning bylaws.

“People need to know about these discussion papers,” says Jane Wilson, chair of Ottawa Wind Concerns, “and the whole engagement process will be better if everyone, including rural residents, can comment.”

“The fact is, even the so-called ‘Rural’ Issues paper, the content is decidedly urban in focus,” Wilson says. “The paper calls for renewable power projects in the rural areas but says nothing about the risks of industrializing rural communities that way. There is no acknowledgement of the noise that would come from power projects, the loss of woodlands and farmland, the danger to groundwater sources, and the loss of property value when quiet communities literally become power plants.”

For wind turbines, the City will be looking at setback distances and noise limits. The City is allowed to create its own regulations for this, following the repeal of the Green Energy Act in Ontario, which took away municipal land use planning power for renewable energy projects. However, all that exists are the Ontario regulations which are unchanged since 2009—a lot of turbines (and noise complaints) have happened since then!

The goal is to help with the process

Ottawa Wind Concerns is hosting several informal drop-in events where residents can get copies of the Discussion Paper summaries, see a map of the zoning in Ottawa’s new Official Plan (where is the “Rural Countryside” anyway? You might be surprised.), pick up fact sheets, and fill out the City of Ottawa survey in response to the Discussion Papers. The survey only allows 160 characters in the online version, but people are free to add detailed comments by using a paper copy, or attaching a letter.

The goal is to help City staff be aware of resident—rural resident—concerns.

Ottawa Wind Concerns is also sponsoring a petition to ask that the City institute a 2-km setback between industrial-scale or grid-scale wind turbines. It will be available for signatures at the drop-in events.

The first date is April 20th at Alfred Taylor Recreation Centre in North Gower, drop in anytime between 5-7 PM.

Next is a drop-in April 26th at the Kinburn Community Centre, Kinburn, 5-7 PM.

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

 

 

Net Zero, renewables, natural gas ban a hot issue in Eastern Ontario

02 Thursday Mar 2023

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

So-called “greens” keep saying going all “renewables” wind and solar will mean prosperity and jobs. Are they right?

 

 

turbinemaststairsdark

Wind turbine at the Nation Rise installation in Finch-Crysler-Berwick: no employee parking lots [Photo: D. Larsen for Wind Concerns Ontario]

March 2, 2023

In the February 25th edition of The North Grenville Times is an Op-Ed promoting the notion of 100-percent “renewables” and criticizing the use of natural gas, which the writer, Steve Gabell, calls “methane” for extra punch.

But there is more to consider in the whole “Net Zero” approach. We wrote a response to the column but unfortunately, the editor advised us and several other letter writers that the topic is too hot for them to give any more space to it. In an email to us, editor Brandon Mayer said if he ran all the letters on this topic, they will fill the entire paper!

Here is our response to the original column.

Letter to the Editor, North Grenville Times

February 24, 2023

Re: OpEd Methane and Renewables, February 23

If writer Steve Gabell had honestly identified himself as president of the local Green Party Constituency Association, readers would have understood that he was writing from the Green Party playbook, not as a result of research and organized thinking.

He trots out the old anti-Ford government statement that the Ontario government “recklessly” cancelled “hundreds of renewable energy contracts” which is false: what got cancelled were over-priced contracts inked by the Wynne government for small projects that would have cost Ontario ratepayer millions for more intermittent unreliable power. Several large unnecessary wind power projects were also cancelled, saving Ontario hundreds of millions in weather-dependent, out of phase with demand power.

Mr. Gabell rages against natural gas which is really used in Ontario only to meet peak demand, and he proposes instead—Green Party policy—100-percent renewables. He says renewable wind and solar are lower in cost. Not true: an independent cost analysis by Power Advisory published in 2021 shows that the costs of wind and solar power were much higher than nuclear or hydro.

If Mr. Gabell were to take off his Green Party hat and do his own research he might come across eminent Canadian environmentalist professor Vaclav Smil who wrote that the notion of 100-percent renewables is “unbounded science and engineering fiction”. It is worth exploring what it would take to create an increasingly non-fossil global energy system, but rushing headlong into part-time power wind and solar won’t help.

One solution proposed is N2N, Natural Gas to Nuclear, but again, Green Party policy will not allow Mr. Gabell to even use the word “nuclear” despite Canada’s long and storied success with clean, reliable, emissions-free nuclear power technology.

The dream of “tens of thousands of jobs”? Wind power has been described as a “workerless” form of power generation. Just drive a few minutes down to the wind turbines in Crysler and look for an employee parking lot.

There isn’t one.

The dream I have is that political leaders could put aside their propaganda messaging on electricity issues and instead promote honest analysis of the best way forward. What we need is a reliable, affordable, emissions-free power grid that will improve life for everyone.

Jane Wilson

North Gower

Jane Wilson is chair of Ottawa Wind Concerns; the community group is fighting a proposal by the City of Ottawa to build as many as 700 industrial-scale wind turbines in the city’s rural areas.

What do we know about Battery Energy Storage? Not much

01 Wednesday Mar 2023

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

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

And we better learn, fast.

Overhead_View_of_Tehachapi_Energy_Storage_Project,_Tehachapi,_CA

Overhead view of 8-megawatt battery storage facility in Tehachapi, USA-Wikipedia image

March 1, 2023

Green energy’s newest fad is Battery Energy Storage Systems or BESS, which is being promoted as an add-on to existing renewable power generation facilities to counteract intermittency and unreliability.

Lobbyist the former Canadian Wind Energy Association, now the Canadian Renewable Energy Association or CanREA is actively pushing BESS, and has even gone so far as to add storage to its corporate banner as in, Wind- Solar- Storage.

CanREA is pushing for TEN TIMES the amount of wind and solar we already have in Canada (won’t that look pretty? And cost us all, too) which they say will work with storage.

However, even the influential lobbyist points to concerns. First, there is a need to develop technical requirements for connecting and operating battery storage facilities CanREA says in its document, Laying the Foundation:

“In many jurisdictions, the technical details may be included in the operating documents of the crown owned utility. However, there are other elements, such as the scope of safety and environmental reviews, that will need legislated descriptions or will need to be included in the regulatory documents of the relevant ministry or government department.” (Page 10)

And, CanREA says, regulating authorities may need to get ready for BESS and develop new competencies:

“In most jurisdictions, the mandate and/or rules of the regulating authority (for example the Alberta Utilities Commission) may need to be enhanced. Regulatory authorities will need sufficient expertise to fairly evaluate proposed energy-storage installations.”

Most people don’t know what they are

In response to inquiries from members and the public, and because BESS is being proposed as an add-on to existing wind power installations, Wind Concerns Ontario undertook a review of experiences with BESS around the world, and reports of citizen concerns, as well as the current regulatory environment.

As one Ontario mayor said, most people don’t even know what they are.

Wind Concerns Ontario prepared a report, with the following conclusions:

  • Standards needed for emergencies – As BESS technology is relatively new, standards are rapidly changing in response to emergency situations encountered. Even projects developed by companies with extensive battery experience have experienced serious emergency situations.
  • Not enough information – The requirements for submissions to the IESO and to municipalities when requesting support for the project include few, if any, details on the actual project. The process appears to assume that once a company is awarded an IESO contract based largely on price, it will then proceed to develop the real proposal which will be submitted into an undefined permitting process or processes. Based on information submitted, it is not clear how the IESO will be able to distinguish between proposals with higher prices because they meet high standards for development and those with lower prices because the proposal includes the minimal safety standards.
  • Renewable energy or not? – BESS systems are neither defined as a Renewable Energy project by Regulation 359/09, nor are they included in the list of excluded projects. The intention may be to omit further provincial review of these projects and to proceed directly to the municipal permitting process but this would be a recipe for substantial delay as the building officials in each host municipality (many of which are small rural municipalities) individually develop the expertise needed to assess and approve these projects.
  • Safety regulations? – While Ontario Hydro has defined setbacks from BESS installations to protect their infrastructure, there are no setbacks for BESS installations established in Regulation 359/09 to protect other buildings and activities. Similarly, there are no noise standards for these systems which could create a new enforcement challenge for Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks field staff.
  • Potential for support to be withdrawn – As the submissions to municipalities have included minimal information, there is potential for municipalities to rescind their support resolution once they learn the risks associated with these projects and the municipal resources that will be potentially required to deal with emergency situations.

Clearly, there are significant issues to be addressed.

Ottawa area BESS

Here in Ottawa, a BESS facility was proposed for the recent Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) Request for Proposals for new power generation. Located on Upper Dwyer Hill Road in the West Carleton-March ward of the city, the project is unheard of for most people. The company proposing the project held a public meeting in December but no one showed up. The IESO allows proponents to simply post a notice on their project website. If you don’t even know about the project, how do you know to check for announcements?

Here are the minutes for the “public” meeting:

MINUTES OF PUBLIC COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT City of Ottawa Public Meeting Location: Alexander Community Centre, 960 Silver St, Ottawa, ON K1Z 6H5 Time: 6-7 pm, January 12th, 2023

Long-Term Reliability Project Name: 548

Site Address: 650 Upper Dwyer Hill Road, Ottawa, ON K0A 1A0

Facility: Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS)

Size: 4.99-megawatt/19.96-megawatt hour

 

Proponents Name: 1000234763 Ontario Inc.

Attendance: • 0 community members •

Proponent – 1000234763 Ontario Inc., representative: o John Kozak, COO • Proponent’s Contractor, SolarBank Corporation (previously, Abundant Solar Energy Inc.) o Tracy Zheng, CAO o Mila Simon, Project Coordinator 6ii

6:00 PM: meeting called to order. Proponent and SolarBank waited for 45 minutes for attendees. No community members showed.

6:45 PM: Meeting adjourned.

Another BESS proposal is in development in Cumberland, that would be ten times the capacity of the Upper Dwyer Hill Rd facility. In response an email inquiry, developer Evolugen (a division of huge power developer Brookfield) replied:

We are still in the process of assessing potential sites for a battery storage energy system in the Cumberland area to respond to two announced procurements (expedited and long-term RFP). The two public meetings were held to gauge at a high level the type of reaction that this type of project would receive in this area. We don’t record public meetings because they are drop-in format rather than a presentation with a Q and A. But we are always available for one-on-one meetings. The IESO released the final RFP document in early December, but had released a series of documents (including a draft RFP) in preceding months to provide project proponents with a general idea of what public outreach requirements were required.  

As we have more information – we will continue to update our project specific website: Rabbit Battery Energy Storage Project – Brookfield Renewable (evolugen.com)

Nick Best, Director, Public Affairs

Another inquiry, this time to the Cumberland Community Association, revealed the association knew nothing about the proposal. Or the public meetings that were held.

Time to ask questions

Doubtless, still more BESS proposals are coming with the IESO set to open up yet another RFP later this year, this time for almost twice as much new power generation.

We need to learn more to be able to ask questions about the impact of these installations on our communities, the environment, and our economy.

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

 

Rural councillors propose motion to protect health, safety

09 Thursday Feb 2023

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

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, ,

Ottawa has no new zoning bylaws to protect rural residents from environmental impacts from new power projects

View of a street in Crysler, south of Ottawa, with wind turbine 2 km away. There have been so many noise complaints that the local board of health is conducting a review. [Photo: D. Larsen for Wind Concerns Ontario]

Two Ottawa city councillors have put forward a motion regarding new power generation facilities, demanding that municipal support be mandatory, and that any power projects be in the best interests of the people who must live near them.

Because Ottawa will not have new zoning bylaws until 2025, what the two rural ward councillors are saying is, rural area residents need up-to-date protection in terms of setback distances and noise limits from power projects, which are an industrial use of the land.

Ontario’s regulations for wind turbines, for example, were created in 2009 and remain unchanged, despite advances in knowledge about such negative environmental impacts as noise pollution, strobe effect, risk to wildlife, and danger from fire, ice throw or catastrophic equipment failures.

Community interests foremost, councillor says

Councillor David Brown submitted a notice of motion on February 1st, seconded by Ward 5 Councillor Clarke Kelly.

Here is what Councillor Brown wrote in the current edition of the Manotick Messenger about the motion.

“At issue is the Independent Electricity System Operator or IESO and its ongoing efforts to procure energy projects across the province. Though energy projects generally receive support from municipal councils before proceeding, the authority is unclear; IESO could attempt to work with a project proponent without the approval of Council.

This means that an LNG power plant, a wind turbine, a solar farm, or any other project could arise without the support of the community.

Additionally, Ottawa is in the process of updating its by-laws. Once completed, these updated by-laws will hep future development better conform to the objectives of the city’s Official Plan. This includes energy infrastructure in general and wind turbines in particular. It is essential that new by-laws be finalized and approved before wind turbines are brought to Council’s attention for consideration and approval.

These are the issues that my motion seeks to address. The goals of this motion are to ensure that Council is able to act as the final authority on energy generation in our City and that new generating infrastructure respects our City’s soon-to-be-updated by-laws.

As new energy generation capacity is likely to be placed in the rural areas of Ottawa, it is vital that new facilities be well considered and respect residents’ needs and our communities’ interests.

No project should be advanced without being in the clear interest of those who live close to it.

By advancing this motion I am hoping to better protect our communities against potentially harmful overreach.

David Brown

Ward21@ottawa.ca“

As of last December, the IESO process appeared not to allow municipalities final say in power project approvals, and energy minister Todd Smith recently wrote the IESO a letter asking them to be specific. Early in the current RFP process, municipal support could be “evidenced” by a letter from a planner, or by the issuing of building permits. Issuing building permits is an administrative process, and not an indication of Council support.

Ottawa lags in regulations for safety, health

Ottawa Wind Concerns has called for greater transparency on new power projects, and made several presentations in the past to the previous Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee. Last year, the then councillor for Ward 21 said there was no need for Ottawa to act because there was no RFP process for new power projects, and sent emails in September to members of both the agricultural/rural and environmental protection committees. The truth was, at that point, the IESO documents were already in the engagement and revision phase, and well known to other jurisdictions.

The RFP commenced December 7, 2022.

Ottawa Wind Concerns has recommended a setback of 2 km from wind turbines to residential areas, based on the recommendation from Wind Concerns Ontario.

The City of Ottawa has expressed interest in promoting wind turbines. Ottawa’s $57B Energy Evolution plan calls for 3,200 megawatts of wind power, or more than 700 industrial scale wind turbines in the rural areas of the city.

During the 2022 municipal election campaign, all candidates in Ward 21 pledged to work for a review of that plan.

New motion to be presented soon

The motion set for February 8th has been deferred to next Council meeting because of technicalities with the local power utility, but will be presented again February 22nd.


ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Ontario to launch request for new power projects next week

01 Thursday Dec 2022

Posted by in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

turbinemaststairsdark

Is Ottawa ready? NO.

December 1, 2022

Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator or IESO will launch its Long Term-Request for Proposals (LT-RFP) next Tuesday, December 6th.

The aim of the LT-RFP according to the IESO is to: “seek resources that can be in service between 2026 and 2028 to address global and regional needs.”

Energy Minister Todd Smith issued a directive on October 7th:

11. The Expedited Process, Upgrades Solicitation, and L T1 RFP shall be open to all resource types that meet the mandatory criteria established by the IESO, which may include renewable energy, energy storage, hybrid renewable energy with storage, biofuels and natural gas-fired generation.

The RFP has been in development for many months, despite the continued assertion by former Ward 21 Councillor Scott Moffatt who insisted that there is no procurement process in Ontario. When he wrote to members of Ottawa’s Planning and Agricultural and Rural Affairs committees that there was no plans for new power procurement (to head off a presentation by Ottawa Wind Concerns), the IESO was in the final phases of implementing the RFP.

Now, Ottawa could see proposals for new power projects.

The process will be very quick: announcement of successful bidders will come in March of 2023, according to IESO documents dated mid-November.

But we’re not ready.

Ottawa has no new zoning bylaws in place to deal with new power proposals and in fact, the zoning bylaw process following the new Official Plan is stalled due to concerns about new provincial legislation.

As well, we know from the experience with wind turbines since 2009 and the Green Energy Act, there are lots of problems with these industrial-scale projects. Noise, damage to aquifers, and risk to wildlife including endangered species are impacts seen all over Ontario. But regulations for noise and setbacks have not changed.

When the Green Energy Act was revoked by the Ford government in 2018, planning powers were returned to municipalities, who are now able to set their own regulations for noise limits and setback distances.

But Ottawa hasn’t done that.

The solution? Recommended to us by our planning consultant, and as already done by several other Ontario municipalities, Ottawa could pass a motion that is a simple statement of policy intent, to the effect that until new zoning bylaws are approved, the City of Ottawa will not review or approve any proposals for power generation, including wind power.

City staff have already expressed concern about the speed of the LT-RFP process and the fact that municipal approval doesn’t seem to be mandatory, though the Ford government promised that it would be. Other municipalities are worried about this IESO process which, they say, doesn’t give enough time for proper public consultation, or for a full assessment of new power development proposals such as analysis of the effectiveness of the technology being proposed, and what impacts the project could have on the environment.

We met today with new Ward 21 Councillor David Brown, who shares our concerns about the IESO RFP. He is already taking action on it.

We hope that the new Council will act quickly to ensure that the City is not sandbagged by new power generation proposals that are not appropriate to our area, and specifically that Ottawa’s rural communities will be protected from industrialization by unreliable and noisy grid-scale wind turbines. We hope that any new power generation would be for power that is reliable and affordable, and actually does something for the environment and climate change. That’s not expensive, invasive, out-of-phase with demand wind power.

 

Ottawa Wind Concerns

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

 

directive-from-the-minister-of-energy-20221007-resource-eligibility-1Download

Pleas for protective bylaws for noisy wind turbines get nowhere with Ottawa councillor

11 Tuesday Oct 2022

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Not “forward-thinking”: Ottawa is not acting on its opportunity to protect rural citizens against wind turbine noise and vibration. [Photo: D. Larsen for Wind Concerns Ontario]

Planning committee co-chair responds with condescending, hostile messages; continues to deny Ottawa plans for wind turbines

October 11, 2022

While Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) prepares to launch new procurement initiatives for power generation, and wind power developers line up to apply for contracts, at least one councillor with the City of Ottawa denies the need for the city to issue protective bylaws for noise and setbacks for health and safety now.

Ottawa Wind Concerns has been updating the Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee (ARAC) as well as city staff charged with developing new zoning bylaws on both the need for protective regulation and the fact that other municipalities have already taken these steps. We made a presentation to ARAC in April, detailing the need for protective regulations, emphasizing that current provincial rules are inadequate.

Recently, we submitted letters to both the Planning Committee and ARAC warning that if the IESO opens the door to new wind power proposals, it will be too late to create bylaws for noise and setbacks. Ottawa needs to take action now, before proposals are made.

Here’s what we told ARAC:

SUBMISSION TO CITY OF OTTAWA AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
Urgent need for protective zoning bylaws for wind power projects/wind turbines
September 28, 2022
This is a follow-up to our submission and presentation on April 7th by Ottawa Wind Concerns
board member Michael Baggott, requesting protective zoning bylaws and a setback distance of
at least 2 km for industrial-scale or grid-scale wind turbines. We have discussed this
presentation with the Carleton Landowners and have their support in making this submission.
What is new:
The Independent Electricity System Operator or IESO is launching several Requests for
Proposal, to acquire 3,500 megawatts of new power generation. (Reference:
https://www.ieso.ca/en/Sector-Participants/Resource-Acquisition-and-Contracts/Long-Term￾RFP-and-Expedited-Process )
The IESO has released a list of Qualified Applicants, of which more than a dozen are wind
power developers.
One new contract has already been awarded (an extension to Melancthon I) and wind power
developers have already announced their intention to propose new projects. (Capital Power,
September 22, Windsor, Ontario)

The City of Ottawa confirms that it wants “predominately wind and solar” power to achieve
climate action goals (reference: climate manager Mike Fletcher), repeated by climate manager
Andrea Flowers to the environmental protection committee May 17th: “We have explicitly said
[our plans] would include wind and solar.”
The IESO has released a set of draft documents related to municipal approval and community
engagement. Deadline for stakeholder comment is September 30.
Problems:
As documented previously, Ontario current setback for noise of 550m is inadequate and not
aligned with regulation in other jurisdictions today.
Setback from roadways, public pathways etc. not adequate for protection
Once proposals are made, and officially submitted, a zoning bylaw cannot apply to those
proposals. (Future ones, yes)

Ottawa citizens, particularly those in rural areas who would be forced to have these power
generation projects, are very concerned about noise pollution, impacts on property value,
effects on the aquifer and private water wells, as well as the risk to wildlife including endangered
species.
This was acknowledged by Ottawa staff Andrea Flowers on May 17 when she said the City
would respond to concerns with appropriate zoning.
This cannot wait.
Protective zoning bylaws for grid-scale wind turbines are needed urgently, before any proposals
for new wind power development come forward.
We understand that the City is engaged in developing new bylaws connected to the new Official
Plan, but this bylaw or set of bylaws cannot wait until second quarter of next year when the new
draft bylaws could be presented.
An option would be for a resolution to the effect that the CIty of Ottawa will not review or
approve any proposals for new power generation until after the new bylaws come into effect.
In a meeting we had with Councillor Eli El-Chantiry and ARAC chair on this subject in 2019, we
were told that municipalities can act quite quickly if they have to.
The time to “act quickly” is now.

…

Two days before the ARAC meeting, Ward 21 Councillor Scott Moffatt ( a member of ARAC and also Planning co-chair) sent this message.

I’ll try to be direct so that your Twitter account doesn’t spin my words.

As it stands today, the City does not have an explicit zone that permits wind turbines. All we have is the pending Official Plan which seeks to prohibit their installation in the Agricultural Resource Area. You and I both know that the Province is not required to adhere to municipal policies and by-laws. Nevertheless, the City has committed to reviewing this matter as part of its upcoming Zoning By-Law process.

What you are seeking is a more immediate zoning setback. What you are not considering is that to apply a zoning setback, you need an explicitly permissive zone. I don’t believe the residents of Ottawa would appreciate a quick greenlighting of wind turbines on their properties just so that we can implement a setback that may or may not be respected by the Province.

My position on this has always been that we cannot bury our heads and assume that wind will never come. I’ve also said that there was no current application process for wind, which your Twitter account spun and mocked. Regardless of the recent IESO announcement, I still don’t foresee this current Provincial Government approving wind but they won’t always be in power. While the City will not be an applicant for wind power, we should ensure we prepare for what could come. That led to the OP inclusion and the future zoning discussion. For the sake of the communities you want to represent, I would not recommend rushing that process.

The message was copied to every member of both committees. Not one of them countered the inaccuracies in the message.

  1. The City doesn’t need an “explicit zone” that permits turbines. True, the Official Plan says where they may NOT go, but it is absurd to say that a turbine zone must be described in order for there to be setback or noise regulations, or even a general policy statement. The City already has bylaws about where development may or may not be located, and bylaws governing noise in communities etc. The City has the option to create a resolution, as we suggested, to note its policy intentions, which would help protect in case any proposals come forward now.
  2. “The Province is not required to adhere to municipal policies”—municipalities are free to create their own bylaws, which several have already done with regard to wind turbine noise limits, setback distances, and height restrictions. Yes, the province could enact something like the Green Energy Act which blatantly removed municipal powers, but the current government restored them in 2019. Not going backwards.
  3. Protective bylaws constitute “greenlighting” of wind power projects???
  4. “No current application process for wind”: that was exactly our point. One is coming. And it’s coming fast. We simply asked the City to take steps to protect the residents of rural communities BEFORE it becomes impossible to do so.
  5. The City won’t be an “applicant” for wind power. Maybe not but the $57B Energy Evolution plan and statements by staff make it clear the city’s climate action plan is to increase electricity available which they intend to do by “predominately wind and solar” (City staff quote). So Ottawa may not be an “applicant” but it certainly intends at the moment to encourage wind power development. One of the “catalyst projects” is to have 20 megawatts of wind turbines by 2025. (We learned via documents obtained under Freedom of Information request that the project is “on hold” while the Province reviews requirements for net metering.)
  6. Our Twitter account does not engage in “spin” or “mockery.” Our goal is to inform. The fact is, the City of Ottawa has been woefully unaware of, or wilfully ignoring, Ontario’s disastrous history with expensive, unreliable and ineffective wind power. Why? What’s the agenda?

We showed this response to colleagues who are or who have in the past been municipal councillors and their reaction was that this response was puzzling at a minimum, and disrespectful of community concerns. One commented that the purpose of the response could be taken to be an attempt to “throw you off the scent.”

We also consulted an urban planner who remarked that Mr. Moffatt’s response was “garbled and condescending.” The planner was surprised at the lack of understanding from a co-chair of the city’s planning committee, and additionally that Ottawa is not further ahead on this matter, as are other jurisdictions. “Not forward-thinking” was the planner’s comment.

Again, not one member of the Planning Committee countered the inaccuracies.

We can only hope now that the next Council is committed to a review of the problematic Energy Evolution plan, at least as far as the electricity generation proposals (written for the city by an activist group) are concerned, and that the next Planning Committee is more interested in awareness of current events and potential impacts on rural communities.

Election Day is October 24; next Advance Poll is October 14. Ask questions of candidates NOW and choose wisely.

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

List of IESO Qualified Applicants for new power contracts. Check the companies that are wind power developers. Conclusion: wind is coming.

qualifiedapplicantsDownload

Is the $57B Energy Evolution plan dead?

30 Friday Sep 2022

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

freshly-dug-grave-for-a-funeral

Mayoral candidates pronounce the current climate action plan “unviable” and “wishful thinking” while proposing new ones

September 30, 2022

Ottawa’s municipal election campaign is shining much needed light on the city’s $57B climate action plan, named “Energy Evolution.”

It might even be dead.

We certainly hope so.

Work on the plan was started in the middle of the last decade including a series of “Pathway” studies released in 2017, and culminating in the Energy Evolution document passed by the city’s environmental protection committee and then Council in October of  2020. One Pathway study focused on wind power and acknowledged that Ottawa was a “low” wind resource area (translation: not enough wind to run turbines), the problem could be solved by offering developers more money to come here anyway. The result would be higher electricity bills, but not more reliable power.

While the city claims it conducted public engagement for the plan, it appears that a select group of “stakeholders” was contacted for their applause, and the plan was presented to Council within six months of official declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A casual inquiry of Ottawa citizens will reveal that few people know about the plan and its very hefty price tag, which relies heavily on support from all three levels of government. (To compare, Toronto has a climate plan, too. TransformTO has a budget of $6 million a year.)

A report in today’s Ottawa Citizen says a mayoral debate focused on the environment held September 29th saw candidates presenting their own plans for climate action. Former mayor and now candidate for a repeat gig Bob Chiarelli said the current plan, (i.e., Energy Evolution) is “unviable” and based on “wishful thinking.”

He doesn’t say it is out and out crazy but he could have. The electricity portion of the document was written for the city by activist group Pollution Probe, and recommends that Ottawa turn up its nose at the provincial power grid, and create its own power supply. How? By using wind and solar power.

That is not only nuts it’s impossible. Both are unreliable, weather-dependent sources of power that even with the notion of battery storage, cannot possibly power a city of 1.1 million people.

The plan features a raft of other completely unworkable ideas. A half a million heat pumps is prescribed: interesting, but also impossible across the board. The units are large and do create noise; water source heat pumps need a lot of property to install the equipment.

On propane? No problem: switch to a wood pellet heating system. Because burning wood is better than burning propane, right?

There’s more, but we refer you to our earlier post on how the Energy Evolution plan will hit you, hard.

Candidate and former broadcaster Mark Sutcliffe had a few comments about a climate plan. He said he wouldn’t spend $250 million on bike lanes, which was a jab at fellow candidate Catherine McKenney. Sutcliffe talks about planting trees and other measures, but doesn’t say anything about power.

Catherine McKenney never mentions Energy Evolution but they (McKenney prefers the pronouns ‘they’ and ‘them’) were a councillor when Ottawa City Council passed the climate action plan, and is a member of the environmental protection committee to boot, which not only passed the plan before sending on to Council but was presumably the standing committee that had some oversight on the project. McKenney has made statements about renewable energy, but has also said they want to turn the Greenbelt into an urban national park.

That conflicts with Ottawa’s Official Plan which in Section 4.11 states that renewable energy facilities may be located in the Greenbelt as a principal use. The councillor may be thinking that means a few solar panels to power signs or lights, not 600-foot grid-scale wind turbines which would be an industrial use of the land.

Lots of views to choose from but it appears Energy Evolution might get a review under a new Mayor and Council, if not shelved altogether.

We’re betting few candidates are aware that Energy Evolution was used as “evidence” when the City opposed a customer pipeline replacement by Enbridge along St Laurent Blvd to serve Ottawa natural gas customers.

At an all-candidates meeting in North Gower, for Ward 21, all three of the candidates appearing that evening pledged to demand a review of Energy Evolution.

Haven’t read Energy Evolution yet? Here it is: energy-transition-report-1

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

Ward 21 council candidates pledge review of Ottawa Energy Evolution plan

21 Wednesday Sep 2022

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

NGmeetingSept192022

Roads, wind turbines, and City Hall arrogance: themes at North Gower all-candidates’ meeting

September 21, 2022

Planning staff and others at the City of Ottawa may have sensed their ears burning Monday evening.

That’s because participants at an all-candidates meeting in North Gower held September 19 complained bitterly about the lack of real “engagement” or “consultation” from staff regarding major initiatives, whether it the new Official Plan, individual zoning amendment cases, or huge expensive initiatives like the $57B Energy Evolution plan.

The meeting, sponsored by the North Gower Community Association, was attended by candidates David Brown, Leigh-Andrea Brunet and Kevin Setia. Candidate Patty Searl was ill and unable to attend, and Michael Nowack was working, he told the organizers.

Comments were made about how hard it was to get information about city projects and plans, and to feel like comments were being taken seriously, residents said.

Staff put out their reports with their decisions on what actions will be taken, said one North Gower resident. By the time the process gets to “engagement,” it feels like the decisions have already been made, she said.

Mentioned was the city’s “engagement” on garbage collection, the Official Plan, and other policies in development.

City doesn’t “get” rural issues

Citizens spoke about some of the issues being reported in media about what’s important in the 2022 municipal election campaign, and said that the urban-rural divide was clear. The city quite simply doesn’t “get” rural issues.

Transit is a key topic now, as the city is pushing for better use of the multi-billion-dollar transit system and LRT. But Ottawa’s transit system is out of reach for rural residents, some said.

“I’d love to take transit,” said one resident. “But where do I get it? Where do I drive to from North Gower to get a bus or the LRT or whatever? And, I live on a farm and drive a truck—will there be a parking space I can fit into when I get there?”

Leigh-Andrea Brunet said that the mega-warehouse site, which was the subject of a citizen appeal, would have been a good place for a park and ride, where buses could pick up residents needing to go into the city. David Brown commented that work would have to be done on assessing the cost of rural bus routes but that the City-owned client services centre would be a good location for passenger pickup in North Gower.

Comments were made about one mayoral candidate’s proposal to spend $250 million on bike lanes while in rural areas, roads are literally falling apart.

Concern was expressed by several residents over the tone of the current Council, and how there seemed to be “gangs” of councillors as one person put it.

Kevin Setia said his goal would be to work collaboratively with all other councillors.

NO to expensive, unreliable wind turbines

As the questions asked covered various City initiatives and programs promoted by the current Council, the Energy Evolution plan came up repeatedly, particularly the part that calls for powering the city with wind and solar and would require more than 700 industrial-scale wind turbines, to be installed in Ottawa’s rural areas.

Residents recalled the Green Energy Act era in Ontario, which resulted in a loss of more than $30 billion to ratepayers and taxpayers because of expensive, above-market contracts, and asked why Ottawa hasn’t learned from that.

Every candidate agreed that wind power was expensive and unreliable and not appropriate for Ottawa.

In conclusion, all three said they pledged to demand a review of the Energy Evolution plan if elected.

Election day is October 24, 2022 with advance polls in Ottawa available after September 24.

Further all-candidates meetings include Richmond, October 5; Manotick Village Community Association September 28th 7 PM at the Community Centre/arena; West Carleton-March the OFA  will host a meeting Oct. 5 at the Kinburn Community Centre 7 PM; and the Huntley Community Association (HCA) will host an all-candidates debate for Ward 5 council candidates on Wednesday, Oct. 12, 7 PM at the Carp Agricultural Hall.

To contact us, or to be added to our email list, email ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com

 

Conversation on Energy Evolution, wind turbines widens in Ottawa election campaign

29 Monday Aug 2022

Posted by in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

Residents unaware of climate action plan proposals and $57B price tag

Questions were asked at a recent candidates’ debate focused on climate

August 29, 2022

Interest in Ottawa’s $57B Energy Evolution climate action plan is picking up.

And as we suspected, most Ottawa citizens don’t know a thing about it, despite Ottawa’s pledge of “engagement.”

The Energy Evolution plan was approved by Council in October of 2020, mere months into the pandemic, when people had a lot on their minds.

Now, during the campaign for election of a new Mayor and council seats, questions are coming up.

At a recent mayor candidate debate for example (not attended by front-runners Bob Chiarelli or Mark Sutcliffe) Catherine McKenney was asked about the Energy Evolution plan and specifically about the call for 710 industrial-scale wind turbines. “Taller than the Peace Tower,” the questioner said (Not true: they are more like a 60-storey office tower).

Energy Evolution is full of “bold ideas” McKenney responded, but added that they could not recall that wind power had precedence over anything else. Emissions-reduction and solar energy was the focus, McKenney said.

Here’s the problem: McKenny sits on the city’s environmental protection committee and would have heard climate manager Andrea Flowers say this in a meeting in May in answer to a question from Councillor Scott Moffatt:

“What we put forward as part of this motion as a broader picture is if there are sufficient resources we would look at a Distributed Energy Resource for city-owned facilities and land. We have explicitly said that would include renewable energy generation both wind and solar as we have specified in Energy Evolution.”

So, yes, wind, lots of wind, and McKenney should know it.

The question and McKenney’s answer may be viewed here.

A candidate for Council running in the Knoxdale-Merivale ward has taken aim at the Energy Evolution plan (did we mention the $57B?) and spoken out against it in his campaign.

Joseph Ben-Ami is telling taxpayers that they are going to be shocked at the price tag on the Energy Evolution plan, and at the things proposed in it such as banning natural gas appliances, and installing wind turbines. A video of his campaign statement is here.

Ward 21 candidate David Brown has also spoken out against the Energy Evolution plan, and the proposal for wind turbines. In an article published in The Manotick Messenger, Brown pointed out that wind power is consistently unreliable and asks why Ottawa is planning to build hundreds of under-performing, noise polluting wind turbines.

“They certainly won’t be built downtown,” Brown adds. They will be built in Ottawa’s rural communities, causing “irrevocable damage to farmland, wildlife and residents” while causing “energy poverty” for many people, especially those with low or fixed incomes.

Fellow Ward 21 candidate Leigh-Andrea Brunet has also spoken on the urban-rural divide in Ottawa and cautioned that Ottawa needs to be careful to develop policies that promote equality, not division.

There are many weeks to go in the campaign and lots of opportunities to ask questions of candidates.

All-candidates’ meetings are being scheduled: the North Gower Community Association is sponsoring one on September 19th for Ward 21, 7 PM at Alfred Taylor Centre; Manotick Village Community Association is also Ward 21, also plans an event, date TBA.

We are unaware of any meetings scheduled in West Carleton. Please let us know of any events scheduled.

ottawawindconcerns@gmail.com