We recently drove from London to St. Louis, Mo. On our drive to Windsor we saw many wind turbines. After crossing the border and driving through Michigan, Illinois, Indiana and Missouri, we saw no wind turbines.
I guess they do not need any, since we sell our electricity to them cheaper than it costs us to produce it.
The Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County (APPEC) has commenced legal proceedings naming the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) and WPD White Pines Wind Inc. (WPD) as respondents. APPEC alleges that the Feed-In-Tariff (FIT) contract between the IESO and WPD should have been terminated as soon as it became evident that WPD would be unable or incapable of fulfilling the FIT contract terms. These FIT contract terms have been made publicly available and are well known.
In 2010, a FIT contract for 60MW wind energy project to be operational within three (3) years was offered by the Ontario Power Authority (now the IESO) to WPD. The contract allowed for termination if the project was not able to deliver at least 75% of the contracted power. A Renewable Energy Approval (REA) was granted to WPD by the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) five years later in 2015. Immediately after the MOECC approval, an appeal was made by APPEC to the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT). In 2016 the ERT found that the project would cause serious and irreversible harm to the natural environment. After allowing the proponent an opportunity to propose additional mitigation measures to prevent this harm, the ERT still found it necessary to remove 18 of the 27 wind turbines from the project. As a result, the project is only permitted to erect nine (9) 2.05 MW turbines which can only fulfill approximately 30% of the original FIT contract requirement, far less than the 75% referred to under the contract.
APPEC has made an application to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice seeking a declaration that the FIT contract for the White Pines Wind Project is null and void and an injunction on any further work on the White Pines Wind project. A hearing on this matter is currently scheduled for November 17th, 2017 at 44 Union Street, Picton, Ontario K0K 2T0 at 10:00 a.m.
Kincardine council has decided to give it another shot, in support of some of its citizens.
At the October 4th council meeting, it was decided to send a letter to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) regarding citizens concerns about the effects of wind turbines near their homes.
The mayor says, “Our residents have gone through all the normal channels, sometimes a few times and the Ministry of Environment has answered some of them from time to time but they still have some outstanding concerns.”
Council was reacting to a letter written by Franklin and Deborah Walpole that states, “We are affected by the Enbridge project but we know that our neighbours living among the turbines of the Armow project have similar concerns.”
The letter suggests that both projects are “operating out of compliance.”
Eadie says it’s time for the municipality to “take it up a level” and demand some specific answers about the concerns of the residents.
She says obviously they would like sound audits to be done and the results to be reported.
The blowout of wind and solar in the Ontario Electricity System is revealed by production levels that are well below the rated installed capacity.
Ontario can produce power from nuclear, natural gas, hydro, wind, solar and biofuel energy generators. The results are recorded in many ways but the three used here are (A) the total installed capacity of each generator type (what was installed), (B) the forecast capability at outlook peak (what can be produced) and finally the (C) generator output by fuel type for 2017 (production).
It is neither possible nor desirable to run the electricity system flat out and some redundancy needs to be built into the system for maintenance and emergencies. The total installed capacity of all fuel types reported is 36,853 MW, but at peak demand the system is capable of producing 26,704 MW of power each hour. The total production that IESO counts on at peak demand is 26,704 / 36,853 = 72% of the energy system potential.
The second column provides the Forecast Capability at Outlook Peak and takes into account deratings, planned outages and “allowances for capability levels below rated installed capacity”. When you compare the installed nameplate capacity for wind and solar with the actual production there is an 80 to 90 % drop in production over nameplate capacity!
The total output for all fuel types (column C) for Jan – Aug 31, 2017 is available on the IESO website – ‘Generator Output by Fuel Type Monthly Report 2017’. The total output from Jan – Aug was 12,023 MW of power produced each hour. According to the IESO the forecast capability of the existing generator stations at outlook peak is 26,704 MW of power each hour. The production from the electricity system was 12,023/26,704 = 45% of the capability. So why did we agree to purchase power from Quebec?
The renewables – wind and solar are intermittent power sources and require back-up power. Natural gas was the choice made for Ontario. Natural gas is a responsive base load fuel that can be ramped up or down quickly. Nineteen natural gas plants have been commissioned in Ontario since 2003. According to the IESO they are capable of producing 8,371 MW of power each hour, yet the natural gas plants only produced 416.7 MW of power each hour from Jan – Aug. We have gas plants operating at 4.9 % of their potential!! This means that they are being under utilized and sit idle the majority of the time. The private for profit corporate owners are not running a charity so the Ontario ratepayers are paying millions of dollars each month to gas plants paid not to produce power.
Wind and solar on the other hand blew out. They were only able to produce 13.2 to 18% of their nameplate capacity. The production from wind for Jan – Aug 31 was 764 MW per hour from a name plate capacity of 4,213 MW. A dismal performance with 18% production from the installed nameplate capacity. According to the IESO the forecast capability for wind at peak demand is 533 MW or 12.7% of the installed capacity. The difference is explained as an “allowance for capability levels below rated installed capacity.” No kidding – considerable distortion exists in the presentation of material when a product has an 80% drop in production over the stated manufacturer nameplate capacity. This is like telling me that my new car is capable of 1000 km on a tank of gasoline and instead it goes 200 km!
According to the IESO the monthly wind capacity contribution values range from 12.6% to 37.8% of the installed capacity (18 – Month Outlook p.19). So the nameplate capacity of an industrial wind turbine is somewhat arbitrary.
To understand the limits of wind power, Glen Schleede explains it best. “Wind turbines have little or no ‘capacity value’ because they are unlikely to be producing electricity at the time of peak electricity demand. Therefore, wind turbines cannot substitute for conventional generating capacity responsible for providing reliable electricity to customers.
Second, a kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity from wind has less value than a kWh of electricity from a reliable (dispatchable) generating unit providing base load power – nuclear, natural gas or hydro which can produce electricity whenever the electricity is needed.
These issues are important because “wind farm” developers and lobbyists have misled the public, media and government officials by making false claims and by using terms intended to confuse their listeners
The true capacity value of a wind turbine or ‘wind farm’ is generally less than 10% of nameplate capacity and often 0% or slightly above — simply because, at the time of peak electricity demand, the wind isn’t blowing at a speed that will permit the turbine to produce any or much electricity. Claims of wind turbine capacity value have been exaggerated by wind industry officials and lobbyists, by regulatory agencies”, and as we are finding out in Ontario industrial wind turbines generate a minimal amount of electricity.
The IESO hourly wind generator output 2006 – the present provides data on every industrial wind facility in Ontario. If we use the West Lincoln NRWF industrial wind facility as an example we find that the facility is rated at 230 MW nameplated capacities. On average the facility produced less than 27 MW per hour during July, Aug and Sept of 2017, when electricity is generally at its greatest demand. The production was 11.7% of the name plated capacity! It never once reached its nameplate capacity of 230 MW and it only went above 200 MW for 20 hours in the last three months.
Hydro – a baseload renewable energy source – produced 3242 MW of power per hour from Jan – July from a potential of 5,786 MW. So we are only using 56% of the potential production from our cleanest, greenest, cheapest energy source. The sad reality for the ratepayers of Ontario is that the hydro plants could easily have been ramped up an additional 850 MW per hour to cover the contribution of wind and solar. Instead we ran the water over the dam.
Using nameplate capacity creates a false sense of the ability of renewables – wind and solar – to provide power. Wind and solar are both intermittent so we can not ramp them up or even depend on them for power because they only produce power when the wind is blowing or the sun is shining.
Consumers know they want the lights kept on, the refrigerator running and the industry rolling. But it is difficult for consumers to make informed decisions about the success or failure of a program when information is presented in such a convoluted manner. The renewable energy initiative in Ontario was a political decision. According to several reports from the Auditor General the Ontario government did not conduct a cost benefit analysis. To continue installing a power system that can not provide power on demand to cover up a bad decision will eventually lead to failure of the total electricity system and will be considered an act of betrayal by the ratepayers that are responsible for the bill.
To accommodate the wind industry, we are paying for hydro power generators to run inefficiently; we are paying for power generators not to produce; we are entering into contracts to purchase power when we are awash with over production and with the “Fair Hydro Plan” we are downloading $20 to $40 billion of debt onto our children and grandchildren.
To the very end…
“It will be expensive. And it’ll be expensive when I win my suit in Ottawa because that will make all of the IWT’s illegal, they’ll all have to come down, and somebody’s going to have to pay the bill.”
– Alan Whiteley re: Ontario’s “Fair Hydro Plan”
Alan Whiteley presentation to the committee on Ontario’s Fair Hydro Plan links the government’s response to escalating electricity rates and harsh decisions people are forced to make in the face of energy poverty. Ontario is taken to task over to its failure to assess costs ,benefits and adverse consequences of its renewable energy policies.
Alan Whiteley is the legal lead for the Judicial Review before the Courts of Ontario’s Green Energy Act (GEA). The challenge is predicted to be successful and would result in making all erected Industrial Wind Turbines in Ontario illegal resulting in a very expensive bill to be paid as remedy.
“The legislature and all Ontarians must be able to rely on the Province’s consolidated financial statements to fairly report the fiscal results for the year. This year they cannot do so”
-Auditor General of Ontario
What have been the costs of Ontario’s energy policies? The Auditor General of Ontario highlights issues in the Government’s fiscal reports in its recent news release.
Impacts of energy policy decisions can be found within the example of ongoing discord over the build out of renewable energy projects such as wind facilities. The Government continues to face criticism over its failure to undertake cost and benefit analyses. Economic stress is being realized and demonstrated by the rapid and dramatic rises in electricity rates and the threat of even more bill spikes predicted. Higher electrical bills remain the trend despite Government’s reduction measures recently introduced.
“Lysyk also warned that the accounting design the Government created for the electricity bill reduction under the Ontario Fair Hydro Plan Act, 2017 may lead to a larger understated deficit and net debt next year. A Special Report on this subject will be tabled in the fall. “
Energy poverty and economic impoverishment are personal threats to individuals, families and communities who are struggling to get by. Politicians massage numbers to fit desired images they want to create and sell but at the end of the day it results in selling out the people they were elected to serve.
Aug 14 • Letters to the Editor •
Sir: Mayor Hope, you and Chatham-Kent council are playing a game. A very dangerous game that is affecting the life style as well as the very livelihood of some of your constituents.
Mayor Hope, you and most of your councillors do not know what is going on within Chatham-Kent, especially in regard to the wind farm sites in the former Dover and Chatham townships. This is proven by the fact that most of you have never visited any of the reported problem sites to see firsthand what the affected families are experiencing. You are making decisions based on what you hear from the wind companies, their associates and the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change – all of whom have biased opinions based on profits or their lack of willingness to admit that they made errors.
In addition, you as mayor and council, who have invested $8 million of the Chatham-Kent taxpayers’ reserve fund, are in conflict of interest with regards to any decision made on wind farms or any conflicts arising form them.
You, Mayor Hope, indicated that, “the group (WWF) had a chance to meet with the MOECC ‘and they turned it into a circus.’” You were not there!
Do you recall that the MOECC, having been given a list of questions over one month before the meeting and not answering one of them being a circus? Do you consider the MOECC not giving WWF a promised copy of the minutes of the meeting that they promised part of the circus? Would those minutes have exposed their incompetence?
You indicate that you do not release all of your correspondence to the public. Perhaps you should. How many things are you hiding? Did you ever think that in the letter, received by Freedom of Information, that Mr. Murray’s reply might have been important information? In Mr. Murray’s reply letter it states, “The measurement of turbidity is a key test of water quality because it captures the potential impact that a vibration from a wind turbine could have on a water well. The ministry is aware that some residents are concerned that wind turbine vibration may shake sediment loose in a water well. These particles could have a chemical make-up of heavy metals that are naturally occurring in the area; however any existing heavy metals in the rock particles do not dissolve with vibration. Should a wind turbine vibration cause elevated turbidity in a water well, the wind farm company would be required to implement a contingency plan that is to include, as a minimum, remedial measures to be undertaken by the company, at the company’s expense, to resolve any impacts to wells or well water resulting from the construction, operation, or decommissioning of the facility.”
Mayor Hope, don’t you want your constituents to know that there can be heavy metals in their well water?
All of the affected wells in Dover were once clear water producers and now carry particles that the MOECC refuses to analyze for chemical content. Particles of 30 to 40 microns in size or larger can be seen by the human eye. Particle smaller than that cannot be seen.
In tests done to date by well owners in Dover Township, it indicates that almost half of the particles carried in the water are less than one micron in size. These particles can penetrate skin and walls of body organs. Approximately another 25 per cent of the particles are less than two microns in size.
These particles may carry the heavy metals, to which former Minister Murray refers, such as uranium, arsenic and lead. This is why, Mayor Hope, you should have released Minister Murray’s letter to the public, so the public could have been made aware.
According to the MOECC turbidity measurement, on which the MOECC hangs its hat, this water should be safe to consume. Why do they not take a total analysis and find out what is dissolved in the water and what are the particles carried by the water and if it is safe to drink.
I strongly suggest that the mayor and all of council visit one of the affected sites. If you find it too humbling to visit with one of your constituents, then go without using any of your water for drinking or cooking and think about what effect contaminated water could have on you when you bathe or wash your clothes. Perhaps all other people who are not sure of the effect of not having potable water should also try this for a period of time.
Water wells have gone for decades producing clean, clear water. Common sense would indicate that after the wind farms drove piles in Dover Township and ruined wells there, we would stop building wind farms. We now have piles being driven in Chatham Township and wells are now being ruined there as well. Obviously, there is a direct correlation between pile driving and a negative effect on water wells.
When will those with some authority ever wake up?
Is the solution bigger turbines in the Otter Creek Wind Farm? What would you expect to happen there?
Water security, Mayor Hope, is not a circus or a game. At the Windsor meeting with the MOECC, which you did not attend, it was the citizens of Chatham-Kent that were trying to protect the water security of the municipality, not you.
Mayor Hope, in the future when you receive information about public health, share the information with the public.
“The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through
changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.“
– Club of Rome; The First Global Revolution (page75)–
Workers locked out of a wind turbine blade plant in Tillsonburg Ontario were called to a community hall a few days later and given their dismissal notices. The plant is shutting down as not being economically viable. The plant’s opening protested by those who oppose the harms of wind power installations and its closing came a very short 6 years later. Hundred of workers in a small community now without work as wind industry jobs proved to be temporary. The turbine blade plant in Windsor now placed on a watch list for a similar and predicted demise. Ontario’s green energy economy an illusion that has been running on rate payer generated subsidies.
Kelly McParland: Another wheel flies off Ontario’s green energy bus, and lands on 340 workers
Despite overwhelming evidence that governments do badly when they try to remove the freedom from free enterprise, Wynne and McGuinty ploughed ahead with their green energy vision
When former premier Dalton McGuinty visited the new Siemens Canada plant in Tillsonburg in 2011, he brushed aside protesters and boasted that the plant was part of the Liberal alternative energy plan that would “put us at the forefront in North America.”
The plant made windmill blades. Windmills were the future. Clean energy was what McGuinty’s two-year-old Green Energy Act was all about. It would free the province of old, dirty manufacturing and introduce new, cutting-edge jobs that would make Ontario the envy of the world.
Just six years later the plant is closing. Management says big changes in the wind industry make it no longer viable. The cutting edge plant that was to help lead Ontario into the Valhalla of a clean energy future can’t survive in a market that wants bigger blades.
McGuinty has long since faded into retirement. He chose to step down rather than endure further questioning about an earlier energy fiasco. There was no sign of his successor, Kathleen Wynne, outside the factory, Tuesday, as newly-jobless workers sought an explanation for the closure. “There was quite a bit of anger in there because they shut the place down the other night and never really told anybody about it,” one complained to The London Free Press. “It was bang, everything was locked down.”