Tag Archives: Wynne government

Ontario’s big green suicide plan: The Financial Post

17 Tuesday May 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

The end of Ontario’s lifetime of economic progress…

Environment Minister Murray : the first time assisted death has been tried on a whole province, says Kevin Libin

Environment Minister Murray : the first time assisted death has been tried on a whole province, says Kevin Libin

The Financial Post, May 17, 2016

To get an idea of what Ontario could look like a couple of decades out under Liberal energy minister Glen Murray’s “climate action plan” — which was revealed in detail in Monday’s Globe and Mail — who better to rely on than the man himself, Glen Murray?

Back in 2008, when he chaired the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, Murray — along with his acting CEO, Alex Wood, now executive director of the Ontario Climate Change Directorate — offered up a plan that looked remarkably similar to the new Liberal cabinet document. In fairness, the NRTEE document hardly offered the perniciously micro-managed prescriptions for people and businesses that Murray has graduated to now. And this new plan, billed by the Liberals as a “once-in-a-lifetime transformation” for Ontario’s economy, may also prove the end of Ontario’s lifetime of economic progress. In an era where assisted dying is the big thing with Liberals, this could be the first case where it’s tried on a province.

The leaked cabinet document, reportedly signed-off on by Premier Kathleen Wynne, lists a jaw-dropping 80 or so policies including: The eventual ban on heating new homes and buildings with natural gas, with only electric or geothermal being legal; $4 billion to be doled out by a “green bank,” funded by carbon taxes, to subsidize retrofits of buildings to get them off natural gas; the requirement that homes undergo an “energy-efficiency audit” before they can be sold; and a stack of rules, regulations and handouts to get an electric car into every two-car household within eight years, including rebates, free electric charging, and plug-in stations at every liquor store. Naturally, there will be billions more in traditional government-spending programs on public transit, bike paths, upgrades for schools and hospitals, and “research” funds and centres of climate excellence, not to mention new ethanol fuel standards that will gratify the Liberals’ top corporate donors in the biofuel lobby.

Read the full Comment here.

Municipal support must be mandatory for wind power contracts, says WCO

05 Thursday May 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Coalition of community groups and Ontario citizens says planning process for industrial-scale wind power projects needs to be revised, with municipal support mandatory for any contract

Citizens have good reason for objecting to wind power plants, but government's not listening [Photo: Prince Edward County]

Citizens have good reason for objecting to wind power plants, but government’s not listening [Photo: Prince Edward County]

May 4, 2016

Wind Concerns Ontario submitted a series of recommendations to the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) as part of the “engagement” process on the Large Renewable Procurement (LRP) process on May 3rd.

In a letter to IESO CEO Bruce Campbell, WCO president Jane Wilson wrote:

WCO has been involved supporting individuals and community groups dealing with wind turbines imposed on communities since before the Green Energy Act was enacted. We saw the government’s commitment in 2012 that it would only place wind turbines in communities willing to host them as a positive first step toward addressing the concerns of rural Ontario.  The results from the RFP I process, however, made a complete mockery of this policy. The Minister of Energy stated as recently as March 7 that it would be “virtually impossible” for a contract to be awarded without municipal support.  Yet, three of the five successful bids for wind turbine contracts in LRP I were awarded to municipalities that did not support the project.

The wind power contracting process shows no respect for Ontario citizens and communities, Wilson said.

The key issue is: neither the government nor participants in the procurement process have listened to valid community concerns or displayed any learning from problems created by the existing projects. Most people in rural Ontario seem to know more about the impact of wind turbines (economic, environmental, societal) than the people proposing projects, who continue to use outdated and limited information to support their proposals.  Far from streamlining the process, the Green Energy and Economy Act has created a confrontational environment.  Based on local activities such as municipal resolutions, public demonstrations and media stories, it is clear this situation is not going to change until provincial government agencies deal seriously with the problems that have been created by wind turbine projects to date.

WCO recommendations: let communities choose

The recommendations to change the RFQ and RFP process as well as the generic contract are driven by four objectives.

  • Activities within the process need to be consistent with the high levels of openness and transparency that the provincial government expects of agencies and municipalities.
  • Full disclosure of project information is needed to allow the community to provide meaningful feedback.
  • Mechanisms need to be included within the process to measure the responsiveness of proponents to input from the community.
  • The process needs to place value on and respect for community views on proposed projects.

Among the recommendations was the need for municipal support to be mandatory. “More than 90 municipalities have declared themselves ‘unwilling hosts’ to wind power projects,” says president Jane Wilson. “They have good reasons for that. But this government has no respect for Ontario citizens and their elected governments, who want to plan what is appropriate and sustainable for their own community.”

 

Highlights of WCO Recommendations:

Qualification of bidders

Failure to deliver past projects on time should result in disqualification of bidders

Inappropriate behaviours or actions such as clearing land that is habitat for endangered species while a project is still under appeal, should result in disqualification as a bidder

The qualifications of proponent team members should be evaluated: “experts” in noise and health impacts for example, should have appropriate training/education and proper professional credentials

 

Community engagement

“Engagement” should not be confused with “support”

Public meetings should be more accessible and greater in number, and take place before a municipality is called upon to determine whether it supports a wind power project bid

Communities need much more detail about projects than they were given under FIT or LRP I

Proponents should disclose and have available the full range of documentation on impacts of the proposal including impacts due to environmental noise (potential for adverse health effects), and effect on property value as well as other economic considerations (e.g., airport operations, tourism)

Municipal support must be a mandatory requirement in contract bids

Proponent engagement with Aboriginal communities should be subject to the same disclosure requirements as for other communities

Site considerations

IESO needs to do an independent technical review of proponent submissions

Municipal support

Full documentation should be provided to municipalities prior to bid submission, so that local governments can review the information and comment as to completeness and accuracy

Again, a resolution of support from a municipality must be a mandatory requirement for a bid in the RFP process

contact@windconcernsontario.ca

Ontario’s green energy fiasco about to get worse: Globe Editorial

01 Sunday May 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Globe and Mail EDITORIAL, April 29, 2016

Late last year, Ontario’s Auditor-General put out a report detailing the extent of the provincial government’s mismanagement of the electricity system. According to Bonnie Lysyk, thanks to a misguided government policy of artificially pumping up the cost of producing power in the province, Ontarians had overpaid for electricity to the tune of $37-billion between 2006 and 2014, and will continue to be overcharged by another $133-billion by 2032.

The scale of the waste is so large as to be almost incomprehensible, which may explain why Ms. Lysyk’s report was a one-day news wonder when it landed last December. Once the count gets into the hundreds of billions, the mind goes numb. If the province announced construction of the Burning Money Biomass Plant, fuelled by bales of five and 10-dollar bills, it probably wouldn’t be capable of destroying $170-billion.

The size of the disaster in the province’s electricity system is hard to get your head around. But voters, consumers, businesses and especially the Liberal government should be rereading Ms. Lysyk’s report. Because a document leaked to The Globe and Mail this week suggests that the Liberals, who a decade ago broke the electricity system through a fatal combination of good intentions and a willful disregard of both expertise and experience, may be preparing to repeat the exercise with their next greenhouse gas reduction plan.

The thing is, Ontario needs a greenhouse gas reduction strategy. So does every province, and so does the federal government. To meet our international commitments, and to bend the curve on global warming, those carbon-reduction goals have to be ambitious. Ontario’s proposed Climate Change Mitigation and Low Carbon Economy Act aims to reduce the province’s 1990 emissions by 15 per cent by 2020, 37 per cent by 2030 and 80 per cent by 2050. The province is committing itself to substantial carbon reduction in the next decade, and a near-zero carbon economy in a generation.

Those are not impossible ideals. They’re doable – using the right tools. Dramatically reducing carbon emissions is not a crazy idea, but the way Ontario is proposing to get to a low-carbon economy almost certainly is.

Ontario went about it all wrong

A decade ago, the government of Ontario started driving up electricity costs with a simple objective in mind: It wanted to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the production of electricity. This was the right objective. But the way it went about it was all wrong. Instead of encouraging the electricity sector to be as efficient as possible, the government essentially ordered it to become costly, inefficient and irrational. Some of this was motivated by fantasies of industrial policy – look, Ma, we’re subsidizing the Green Jobs Of the Future! – and some of it was driven by an insistence on ignoring basic economic advice, much of it coming from the government’s own experts.

The result is that the cost of generating electricity in Ontario has exploded, even as power costs plummeted elsewhere. Between 2004 and 2014, power generation costs in Ontario increased by 74 per cent, according to the auditor. This benefits no one. The higher prices don’t come from carbon taxes; they come from higher electricity production costs. And that imposes a heavy cost on the economy.

However, because prices were rising, Ontarians started using less energy. Power use dropped by 7 per cent between 2006 and 2014. But at the same time, thanks to subsidies to encourage greater power production from green sources, the province’s generation capacity grew by 19 per cent. As a result, the province is now a major exporter of electricity – sold at prices far below the cost of production. The more power the province exports, the more taxpayers and ratepayers lose.

Ontario could have chosen a different route. Instead of politicians completely remaking the electricity sector on a whim, introducing inefficiencies by deciding what power technologies to back and how much to subsidize them, Ontario could have done the opposite. It could have set a carbon-reduction goal, imposed carbon taxes on carbon-generating fuels – and left it to producers and consumers to figure out how to most efficiently respond by reducing their own costs and emissions. It should have taxed dirty power and let the market figure out the cheapest way to get to lower emissions levels.

More enthusiasm than knowledge

Nearly a decade later, this week’s leaked document on its upcoming greenhouse-gas strategy suggests Kathleen Wynne’s government has not learned from her predecessor Dalton McGuinty’s mistakes. Glen Murray, a minister with more enthusiasm than knowledge, is in charge of the environmental file; last time around, George Smitherman was the designated enthusiast.

Ontarians should be worried. …

Read the full story here

North Stormont to consider mandatory municipal support motion May 10

28 Thursday Apr 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Ordinary citizens not invited: Energy Minister Chiarelli (centre) at recent wind power lobby group event

Ordinary citizens not invited: Energy Minister Chiarelli (centre) at recent wind power lobby group event

Although the Ontario Minister of Energy Bob Chiarelli said it would be “virtually impossible” for a wind power developer to get a contract without municipal support, the recent announcement of new wind power contracts by the Independent Electricity Systems Operator (IESO) showed the opposite: three of the five municipalities where wind power developers were successful in getting contracts were officially “unwilling host” communities.

That included Dutton Dunwich, where the municipality had held a referendum, resulting in a vote of 84 percent of residents opposed to the power project. A U.S.-based power developer got the nod to build a huge, 60-megawatt power project. “We don’t live in the Province of Ontario,” the Mayor said; “we live in the Province of Toronto.”

Now, in spite of a surplus of power in Ontario, and power companies being paid to NOT produce power, the IESO is launching yet another bid process, the LRP II, this time for 600 more megawatts of expensive, intermittent and unneeded wind power.

And municipalities are getting ready: a resolution is circulating that notes statements from the Auditor General about the expense of wind power, the surplus power situation, the fact that there are no real environmental benefits from industrial-scale wind power projects and in fact harm to the natural environment results.

The resolution demands that municipal support be a mandatory requirement in future bids, not just a point-getting option for developers.

To date, 17 municipalities have approved the resolution in a few weeks.

May 10, the resolution comes before North Stormont Council at 6:30 PM in the municipal building in Berwick. Concerned Citizens of North Stormont is asking all affected residents to come and support the resolution—take back local control of development, for more effective community planning.

See more information on the Mandatory Municipal Support Resolution at the Wind Concerns Ontario website, here.

 

Green energy done badly: views from around the world

02 Saturday Apr 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

WEEKEND READING

Wind Concerns Ontario

April 2, 2016

We present a collection of stories that review the manner in which strategies that are supposedly positive for the environment have been enacted (usually without any sort of cost-benefit or full impact analysis), and what the results are to date.

From Terence Corcoran’s review in The Financial Post, to a review of German energy policy (this is a sad, sad story worthy of Dickens), an article in Prince Edward County’s Wellington Times (one of the last independent newspapers in Canada) on a wind power developer’s arrogance, and last, an opinion on what the real effect on the local environment green energy policies are in reality, the collection deserves a read … and consideration by the Ontario government.

Will they? In the words of the team of academics lead by the University of Ottawa’s Stewart Fast, writing recently about the disastrous implementation of the Green Energy Act on Ontario communities, “Our recommendations will unfortunately remain unaddressed, without further consideration or assessment of the lessons that could be learned.” [Fast et al. Lessons learned from Ontario wind energy disputes, January, 2016]

Terence Corcoran, The Financial Post, “Clean, green, and catastrophic.” (Note: our Parker Gallant provided some figures for this article.)

Handelsblatt (Global edition) “How to kill an industry”. (Thanks to energy economist Robert Lyman in Ottawa for sending this in.)

Rick Conroy, The Wellington Times, “There’s always a catch.” (“The wolf has been sent to find out what’s killing all the lambs …” Conroy writes.)

Last, this letter to the editor of Ontario Farmer, excerpted here.

“Off-grid will make a bad situation worse for reluctant grid payees”

A farming friend recently took me on a “crop tour” of rural businesses that are partially or fully off-grid. We saw a sawmill, a pressed-steel manufacturer, a maker of wood-burning stoves, a cabinet-maker and an ethanol plant. Finding it progressively more difficult to remain profitable in the agricultural business with skyrocketing electrical costs, my friend is seriously looking at more cost-effective alternatives. If going off-grid works for others, perhaps it will work for him.

“Off-grid” means that these business owners are no longer victims of usurious hydro rates the Ontario Green Energy Act (GEA) has imposed on the vast majority who obtain electricity from Hydro One and other such utility companies. Are these enterprises trailblazers illuminating a path to greater energy independence for other beleaguered hydro ratepayers?

Or are they creating an even greater financial burden for those who remain on the grid?

And what may be the environmental impact if a great many businesses follow suit?

Operating the Ontario power grid has become exorbitantly expensive under the GEA. It is becoming ever more expensive as greater numbers of windmills spring up to further sully our rural landscapes. … Operating costs of a centralized generation and distribution system are borne by all users. The more users there are, the less share of fixed costs each user pays. Businesses fleeing to off-grid energy alternatives leave fewer users on-grid bearing fixed costs; thus, each user pays more. While going off-grid may financially benefit those who do it, greater economic burden falls on those remaining on-grid, and most have no choice.

Fossil fuels are the primary energy source for off-grid users. Electricity to run their businesses must be generated by some sort of power plant, typically an internal combustion engine driving and electrical generator. It’s far removed from the most cost-effective or environmentally friendly way to generate and distribute electricity —the way we used to do it — but the GEA has made grid power so prohibitively expensive off-grid generation has become economically viable for major energy users.

Dave Plumb

Belmont, Ontario

Chiarelli promises more input on wind farm locations (again)

28 Monday Mar 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Rubbing salt in the wounds of the communities who just got notice of wind power contracts forced on them, despite unwilling host declarations, Energy Minister now says process will allow for input earlier in the process. (We’re still not hearing communities can say “No.”)

Just a little bit more "input"? But Bob still doesn't want to hear you say "no."

Just a little bit more “input”? But Bob still doesn’t want to hear you say “no.”

simcoe.com, March 28, 2016

By Jenni Dunning Barrie Examiner

Towns to have input ahead of solar, wind farm decisions

A few weeks after the province approved a wind energy project in Clearview Township, sparking an appeal, Ontario’s energy minister said municipalities will soon be asked for input ahead of future decisions.

“There was a problem with particular large wind and solar farms. There was not enough of an alignment of what they were doing and what the municipalities wanted,” said Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli.

“We are in the process now… It involves much more communication with the municipality. It (will be) almost impossible for (contractors) to win a contract without having participation with a municipality.”

Chiarelli clarified that “participation” referred to approval from a municipality, adding all contractors will be required to show proof they consulted municipalities. One wind energy and 13 solar projects have been approved in Simcoe County, according to the provincial Renewable Energy Projects Listing.

The Clearview project is the only wind farm. There are five solar energy projects in Springwater Township (three of which are in Midhurst), four in Tay Township (three of which are in Waubaushene), three in Orillia, and one in Oro-Medonte.

Chiarelli said he expects the ministry to announce more projects “in a month or two.”

Springwater Township Mayor Bill French said he has noticed the province has slowly started asking municipalities for more input on solar and wind projects in the past year.

They have been asked to use a scoring system to rank their support for proposed projects, he said.

“We always thought there should be a final approval process at the municipal level. It should’ve always been that way,” he said. “We’re quite welcome to that change in legislation.”

French said the township has been concerned when “fairly good agricultural land” was chosen as the location for solar farms.

“The ones that are approved, you can’t turn back the clock on those ones,” he said, adding once municipalities are more involved, Springwater will likely approve energy projects in areas with steep slopes or on smaller properties.

“Multi-acre ones, that’s going to be much more of a challenge,” he said. “We have acres and acres of rooftops around. That’s where solar panels belong.”

Collingwood Mayor Sandra Cooper said she has heard the promise of more municipal involvement from Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne.

“I’m hopeful. I just have not seen it thus far,” she said. “Municipalities have been sending the message for quite some time — we need to be part of the process.”

Cooper and the rest of Collingwood council voted last month to legally oppose plans to build a wind farm with eight turbines west of Stayner, near the Collingwood Regional Airport. The town is concerned about the possibility of a plane hitting a turbine.

Cooper said the province made a “snap decision” to approve a wind farm despite of this possibility.

By allowing municipalities more say in the approval process, they can help stop decisions that may negatively affect residents, said Oro-Medonte Mayor Harry Hughes.

For example, a couple in the township built a home about five years ago that ended up being surrounded by a solar farm, he said.

“If municipalities had a say in it, that would never have happened,” he said. “Residents expect their municipal council to have some protection for their property.”

When municipalities are more involved, they can demand companies complete up-to-date soil testing to avoid solar projects taking up quality agricultural land, he added.

The province also does not require companies to repair local roads if damage is caused by solar or wind projects, but some have anyway in Oro-Medonte, said Hughes. …

Read the full story here.

St Isidore residents fear Wynne government will approve second wind farm

24 Thursday Mar 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Smaller project gets the nod in unwilling host communities 2016, while larger power project simply has to resubmit

No community support for greed in Nation Twp [Photo: Ontario Farmer]

No community support for greed in Nation Twp [Photo: Ontario Farmer]

Province okays more wind farms

Ontario Farmer, March 22, 2016 (excerpted)

By Ian Cumming

Sixteen new green energy projects across Ontario, five of them wind turbines and 11 solar farms, were approved by the provincial government on March 10th.

The largest project at 100,000 MW [Editor’s note: this is incorrect–the project is 100 megawatts or 100,000 kilowatts], with the next largest project at 54,000 MW [Editor: 54 MW] was approved for windmills in North Stormont in Eastern Ontario.

That will mean 35 to 50 windmills, depending on their size, says North Stormont mayor Dennis Fife.

They are slated to be hilt about one kilometer west of Finch and head north, just west of Berwick and Chrysler [Crysler], said Fife. For those visiting last fall’s plowing match in North Stormont, the southern end of the project will be about where the event was held.

“We don’t know the farmers who signed the leases,” said Fife.

Being picked was a surprise since the Premier and area MPPs had publicly assured them that no such project would be “forced” on areas such as his, that had declared at council that they were “unwilling hosts,” said Fife.

…

Wind Concerns Ontario noted in a press release that four of the five windmill projects approved for this round were slated for municipalities that had declared themselves “unwilling hosts.”

WCO also predicted that the windmills just approved under this round will cost consumers $1.3 billion over the next 20 years.

..In nearby St Bernardine, windmills were approved for the 32,000 MW [Correction:32 MW] Gauthier Project in this round, but the adjoining proposal in the same county of over 100,000 MW [Correction:100 MW] in St. Isidore was not approved.

However, a day after the announcement Steve Dick, who had helped lead the massive protest against both projects in his county, was not celebrating.

“We’re a pretty disheartened group right now,” he said. “They pretty much steam-rolled over the township.”

Since the Gauthier project was approved, the wiring infrastructure they neded to install will be dovetailing, as planned, with the soon-to-be-approved St. Isidore project, he predicted.

[Editor’s note: Sorry, this article is not available online. We object to the use of the term ‘windmill’s–these machines are industrial- or utility-scale wind turbines that are used to generate power.]

 

Wynne government ‘stealing our future’ says Kemptville resident

16 Wednesday Mar 2016

Posted by in Ottawa, Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

The wrong people profit from wind farms, says homeowner. ‘Grossly unfair’ for government to steal our futures, says Kemptville letter writer

Nowhere near Toronto and Queen's Park: wind power projects reduce rural property values
Nowhere near Toronto and Queen’s Park: wind power projects reduce rural property values

Ottawa Citizen, March 16, 2016http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/letters/your-letters-for-wednesday-march-16-water-windmills-women

Re: New Eastern Ontario wind farms a betrayal, mayors near Ottawa say, March 11.

Home ownership is the biggest investment a person can make.  Many people depend on the value of their homes to underwrite their futures, whether it be generating capital for their kids’ educations, serving as a stepping stone to a better home, or even financing their retirement. Folks who choose to live in rural areas already face challenges in marketing their properties, compared to their city cousins.

With the looming prospect of giant wind farms in their backyards, they are now told they must accept unanticipated decreases in their property values without complaint because “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.” Rural dwellers also pay comparatively huge electricity transmission costs – and, ironically, will likely continue to do so even with the gargantuan structures towering over their homes. It is also likely that their municipal tax burden will not be adjusted to reflect the decrease in their property values.

It is grossly unfair for an all-powerful government authority to callously steal rural homeowners’ futures so that a corporate entity can profit from huge government subsidies and distant cities can meet their rapacious energy consumption needs. At the very least, these folks should be compensated for their loss.

Perhaps a good starting point would be to waive the “welcome tax” levied by the provincial government on home sales for those located within a set radius of wind farm installations, thus boosting the marketability of affected properties. Another measure would be to give these homeowners a discounted rate on their electric bills, or even the same remuneration provided to the farmers who profit from having such installations on their lands.

Burton Blais, Kemptville

Wynne gov’t not listening to municipalities says MPP McDonell

14 Monday Mar 2016

Posted by in Renewable energy, Wind power

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

IESO awards 100-megawatt wind power project to community in spite of no support

Cornwall Standard Freeholder March 13, 2016

Four renewable energy projects located in Stormont, Dundas, Glengarry will be offered contracts by Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator.

So far, at least one township is unhappy with the decision.

EDP Renewables Canada Ltd. has applied for permission to erect an on-shore wind farm in North Stormont. The organization began the Nation Rise project in 2012 with a 60-metre meteorological tower. Since then it has secured more than 4,000 hectares (10,000 acres) through land agreements with approximately 40 local landowners.

However, the Township of North Stormont released a statement last week where it issued a reminder that council voted on July 28 to not support any of the proposed projects within the municipality – including Nation Rise.

Even without the support of the township as a willing host, the IESO still awarded the 100,000 megawatt project a contract.

“The municipality will continue to work in its capacity as a commenting agency in regard to renewable energy projects and the necessary approvals that are required by the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change and the building code,” said the release.

MPP Jim McDonell also expressed his displeasure in the project by questioning the Minister of Energy on the government’s empty commitment to listen to municipalities and their residents who oppose these projects.

“Just before I asked my question, the Liberals said they listened to municipalities,” said McDonell.

“They clearly didn’t. The people of North Stormont and the Township of North Stormont said a clear no to wind farms in their township, rejecting the $9-million incentive offered by the developer in exchange for municipal support.

“This approval makes a mockery of due process and consultation.”

McDonell said he wouldn’t let the subject drop and has filed a Notice of Dissatisfaction with the minister’s answer.

“The minister will have to answer me a week from Tuesday in detail,” said McDonell. “The people of North Stormont deserve a voice when the government denies them one.”

…

Read the full story here

Eastern Ontario wind farm contracts a betrayal of communities

11 Friday Mar 2016

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

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Ottawa Citizen, March 11, 2016

3-MW turbine south of Ottawa at Brinston: Ontario. Communities had no choice. [Photo by Ray Pilon, Ottawa]

3-MW turbine south of Ottawa at Brinston: Ontario. Communities had no choice. [Photo by Ray Pilon, Ottawa]

By David Reeveley

The Ontario government has betrayed rural municipalities by approving new wind farms in places that have explicitly voted against them, mayors say — including just east of Ottawa.

“Since we declared ourselves unwilling hosts, we thought we had it made,” says François St. Amour, mayor of The Nation Municipality. “Because there was some talk in the last provincial election that they would honour municipalities that declared themselves unwilling. But I guess that was just another electoral promise.”

The agency that makes the province’s deals for renewable power is readying a contract for a 32-megawatt wind farm there, one of a bunch of bids from private generating companies it’s just accepted. The other in Eastern Ontario is the biggest of the group, a 100-megawatt project in North Stormont.

Both Eastern Ontario councils took votes in 2015 to say they did not want the wind farms on their territories.

The province’s Green Energy Act, meant to kickstart an Ontario industry in manufacturing and maintaining renewable energy technology, gave virtually no say to local governments on where wind and solar farms might go. Many rural residents believed, and still do, they’re being sacrificed for the electricity needs of cities.

The government pulled back. Under the province’s new rules, municipalities don’t get veto power over renewable energy projects but they do formally get asked to say whether new wind or solar farms are welcome or not. Ottawa’s city council regularly votes its formal support for small solar projects, which is worth extra points when would-be operators submit their bids.

“It will be virtually impossible for a wind turbine, for example, or a wind project, to go into a community without some significant level of engagement,” energy minister and Ottawa MPP Bob Chiarelli told a legislature committee in 2013.

“Engagement.” Not “agreement.”

“We will not give a veto, and no jurisdiction gives a veto, to a municipality on any kind of public infrastructure. That should have been clear to them,” Chiarelli says. Wind farms in rural Ontario are like tall buildings downtown, he says: immediate neighbours may hate them but they’re still needed.

Thirteen of the 16 new contracts got local council approval. All of the ones that didn’t are wind farms — the two here and one in Dutton-Dunwich, between London and Windsor, where residents took the issue up in a referendum and voted 84 per cent against. Two wind farms are going to Chatham-Kent, whose council voted to support them.

“They’ve put municipalities on the sidelines. It seems, though, that municipalities get most of the grief,” St. Amour says. His council first voted in favour of the wind farm in The Nation without a whole lot of thought, he says, treating it like the solar farms councillors have welcomed in the past. Councillors changed their minds after hearing from residents.

“It was rough on council last summer. It was really, really rough. Especially because we can’t do much about it. We thought declaring unwilling hosts was it,” St. Amour says.

Mayor Dennis Fife of North Stormont says his council thought the same. “At one time, the government said that if you came out with something saying you were an unwilling host, that would be respected, but that wasn’t the case,” he says.

The wind farm in North Stormont, near Finch, will probably have between 30 and 50 windmills. “You’re going to see all of them. There’s the health aspect that people are worried about. Noise, blinking lights, all of that,” Fife says.

Read the full story here.