Windham and Grafton soundly voted down the industrial wind proposal for our towns. You’d think we could all take a rest. Not so. Wind-industry moles spring up in every corner of the state, begging to be whacked.
The mole of the week: the Vermont Public Service Board’s “Proposed Rule on Sound from Wind Generation Facilities.”
The gist of this rule-making is: “Help us figure out impossible rules that can’t be monitored or enforced, concerning the noise that can be legally inflicted on Vermonters by our friends, the wind developers.”
You might feel that such rules mean it’s still open season on Vermont’s communities, given that unenforceable standards amount to nothing more than a knowing nod to the wind profiteers. If you’re right, then let us give this particular mole the whacking it deserves.
This is an enchanting place, a captivating landscape.
Where eagles soar and owl sounds fill the night air.
This is a healing place, an enriching place,
Where hawks teach their young to hunt and herons stalk fish on river banks.
But soon, forty-two storey grinding eyesores.
Red strobes filling the night sky.
Hush, Hush, Hush (don’t tell your neighbours)
This is a nurturing place, a meditation place.
Where bats and dragonflies gather mosquitoes at dusk and dance their graceful reel.
This is resting place, a gathering place.
Where monarch butterflies feast on milkweed and gain strength before flight.
But soon, slicing, dicing, killing.
Blood on the fields
Hush, Hush, Hush, (don’t speak of it)
This is a place to throw off the cares of the week.
A place for hammocks and splashing water.
A family place and a place to retire.
To pitch a tent, sleep under the stars.
But soon, vibration, headache, heartache.
Hush. Hush. Hush (shhhh)
This was a neighborly place, a kind place.
Where neighbors shared and helped each other.
But now, the bitterness of helpless rage and loss.
What a shame.
It bears repeating that if you are a land owner who has wind facility infrastructure placed on your property to seek experienced legal advice in regards to the implications and liabilities of being involved in a wind project. Take time to review the current title on your property and don’t be surprised to find debentures (totaling in the sum of tens of millions of dollars) and other instruments attached as is the case for many properties hosting projects located in southern Ontario.
In a recent dispute in Illinois a landmark court decision was issued involving a lien placed by a contractor seeking to recover unpaid sums for construction work done for the Clipper Windpower project. The owners Postensa Wind Structures USA declared bankruptcy in 2013.
“According to John Kreucher, an attorney with Howard & Howard, this is the nation’s first case that considered whether commercial-scale wind turbines should be deemed personal property or fixtures in a lien dispute. Kreucher also says the importance of the ruling goes beyond the legal filing.”
Ontario is engaging in review of its Long Term Energy Policy and encourages public consultation. Attend a consultation session or provide your opinion online.
Ontario has a robust energy supply and it begs the question why contract for even more wind power or build projects such as Amherst Island, White Pines, Fairview Wind? Wind power continues to demonstrate it is out- of -phase with demand and we are selling the unnecessary electricity at a loss and burden of cost to ratepayers. Will the Independent Energy System Operator conduct a critical cost benefits analysis for all renewable energy power sources?
Wind power continues to create adverse harm to the environment and human health. Wind facilities remain fire walled behind the statues of the Green Energy Act shielding it from independent review. This has resulted in disabled protective standards that must be met by other sources of power generation.
The Mayor of the Town of Saugeen Shores calls upon the Ontario Ombudsman to investigate the non-compliance of the Unifor industrial wind turbine that has generated hundreds of complaints due to its noise impacting adjacent residents.
“It is unfair to say the least that APPEC was given six months to prepare and make its case while wpd has been given an excessive amount of time to do this at the remedy hearing, and that APPEC is in the position of having to foot the bill in order to protect Ontario’s at-risk species.”
On October 5 the Tribunal suspended the remedy hearing schedule in order to adjudicate a number of motions from APPEC. The Tribunal’s rulings on the motions could be days, weeks or even a month-plus away.
1. Referral to the Director
This motion is for an Order of the Tribunal to remit the REA (Renewable Energy Approval) for the White Pines wind project back to the Director of the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) for reconsideration in light of the amendments proposed by wpd. A large number of significant amendments to the Project have been proposed. As a result this Project can no longer be said to be the Project “as approved” by the Director.
2. Striking Respondents’ Evidence Affidavits from witnesses for wpd and the MOECC raise issues that as a matter of law could only be properly raised at the main hearing. In effect both wpd…
A while back we covered Esther Wrightman, suggesting that this fine young Canadian gives “courage” a new name.
True to form, Esther’s at it again, telling Ontario’s farmers and families to “Get mad! Stay mad! Make history!”
Here’s an extract of her cracking little speech to the “Unwilling Hosts” Rally in Ontario on 19 October 2013.
“Unwilling Hosts” Rally Speech
Let us be clear about why we are here today. This is a demonstration of “We, The People” versus “We, The Corporations”! I have, of course, borrowed the phrase from the American Declaration of Independence.
This is an in-your-face demonstration of “We, The People” versus the wind energy companies that are strangling rural Ontario — strangling us with the approval and encouragement of our government!
I want to say “Thank you, rural Ontario — you good people who are the backbone of this distinguished province that just…
Last week I was reading of an Australian study, by a Professor Gary Wittert, which had shown sleeping pill usage for those living near wind turbines was no greater than the general population . The study compared those living within 10 km of turbines with those living more than 10 km away. There have been similar studies with property values using a 5 mile or 10 km radius that showed property values are not affected by wind turbines. Had you ever thought why they pick a 10 km radius?
Consider this graphic. It shows 1 km bands with the calculated area for each band shown in blue.
Let’s keep it easy and assume that households are evenly distributed and there is one household for every 10 square kilometers.
So, within 2 km (the two innermost bands) of the turbine, the area is 3.1 + 9.4 km² (=12.5 km²) which would represent 1.2 households.
Now let’s consider the two outermost (9 km and 10 km) bands. The area of these bands is 53.4 + 59.7 km² (=113.1 km²) which represents 11.3 households. So the outermost bands have about TEN TIMES the number of households of those living within 2 km, making sure that the contribution of the inner bands is diluted, swamped, covered up or however else you would describe it.
Or consider if you live within 2 km of a turbine. The outer bands of those living from 2–10 km from the turbine adds up to 301.6 km², which would represent 30.1 households – which is 24 TIMES the number of households within 2 km.
No wonder your voice is being “drowned out”. The bigger the circle, the more “dilution” occurs.
Add this to the list of things where “size matters”, and next time you see a study like this, consider the radius and area that was chosen. The choice of the circle size plays a major role in the result obtained and speaks volumes about the motivation of the author.
by Alec Salt, Professor, Department of Otolaryngology, Washington University School of Medicine
In light of Energy Minister Glenn Thibeault’s recent announcement suspending LRP-2, we are now calling on the provincial government to also cancel the recent LRP-1 contracts, including the Strong Breeze Wind Project in Dutton Dunwich. Ontario does not need the energy and this cancellation would save Ontarians Billions of dollars!
We need your help by participating in our letter writing campaign. It is easy and will only take a quick moment of your time.
Below you will find a copy of the letter we are asking you to sign. All you need to do is send us your email address, either in an email to email@example.com, or in a private message through Facebook. You will then be emailed a ‘DocuSign’ to sign. Simply open it and follow the on screen instructions to review and sign the letter. Once we receive your signed copy, a hard copy will be printed and mailed to the addressees stated in the letter on your behalf. We encourage each member of your family to sign a copy of the letter. Just send their email address and we will send a separate letter for them. Rest assured that any information you provide will remain confidential, and will be used only to send these letters .
If you would prefer to mail a copy of the letter on your own, contact us and we will provide you the necessary information and addresses.
In addition to the letter writing campaign, our DDOWT volunteers will be going door to door with a petition to show the strong support in our community for cancelling this project. Please participate in both of these efforts as they are absolutely necessary for added pressure on the provincial government. If you would like to sign the petition, but do not receive a visit by the end of November, please contact us through email or Facebook.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Thank you for your continued support! The fight is not over!!