Destruction of wild places occurring globally for construction of wind turbines. WPD wind developer land clearing in globally endangered species Blanding’s Turtle habitat. Prince Edward County, Ontario
It’s interesting — and frustrating at the same time — to see the anger and uproar from environmentalists in recent news stories surrounding the blue picture frame at Garden of the Gods and the power plants in Colorado Springs.
With regard to the “Blue Frame,” people act like it was in a wilderness area instead of being in an urban area. The big picture, though, is this supposed environmental concern for the region with regard to the power plants. These plants were installed in the area of high-density power consumption, which at least makes this large population center responsible for their consumption.
The recent ideas are to put the undesirable power-generating alternatives out in the country disguised as “green technology” — wind turbines and solar panels euphemistically referred to as “wind farms” and “solar gardens.” That sounds so nice and harmless and makes people feel good about themselves as they look around their urban areas, and as long as they don’t have to see these behemoth eyesores with the required transmission lines it’s all good.
I understand that the image of Colorado (at least among Front Range urbanites) doesn’t include the plains, but that shouldn’t give them the right to trash out this area of relatively undisturbed land to feel good about themselves.
I just hope that real environmental groups will step up and see these things for what they are — a huge increase in the destruction of the environment. If people in urban areas really cared for the environment they would want power generation to be confined to the area of consumption instead of increasing their footprint out in the countryside.
SAY WHAT?! Seriously you cannot make this stuff up and it’s certainly no joke. The Canadian government has been spending our tax dollars on candy cane tainted fluff and it has truly lost its mind. The media world wide has been buzzing (Canada: Santa’s Moving To South Pole Because of Global Warming ) over a recent posting claiming Santa will be relocating to the South Pole as a refugee due to climate change.
Who is Horizons Canada? How is it influencing the political climate in the ongoing battle against the lived experience of harms from wind powered facilities?
Who we are
Policy Horizons Canada, also referred to as Horizons, is an organization within the federal public service that conducts strategic foresight on cross-cutting issues that informs public servants today about the possible public policy implications over the next 10-15 years.
Horizons’ mandate is to identify emerging policy issues and explore policy challenges and opportunities for Canada, as well as to help build foresight literacy and capacity across the Government of Canada. Horizons’ experienced futurists provide expert advice on emerging issues, foresight and scanning through one-on-one discussions, interdepartmental meetings, and facilitated workshops. All engagement requests are discussed collaboratively at the Horizons’ senior management table on a weekly basis. To engage with Horizons, please submit your request to questions@horizons.gc.ca.
Vision: To promote a high and sustainable quality of life within a globally competitive Canada, through the co-creation and advancement of knowledge that informs and structures policy choices for the Government of Canada by way of an integrated and longer-term perspective.
Mission: To provide timely and integrated perspectives on emerging policy issues for the Deputy Minister community by: bridging people, ideas, data, issues and evidence in an open and constructive environment; co-creating knowledge for understanding complex Canadian policy challenges; and experimenting with new tools and methods.
Exploring trends and postulating the future, Horizon Canada sees government policies dancing with wind and other renewables such as solar, fueling everything from the grid, to the internet and transportation.
Emerging “Urban” Electric Grids
Increasing demand for electricity coupled with emerging sources of electricity production and storage could require new (smart, decentralized) approaches to managing the urban power grid. Over the next 10 to 15 years, cities’ power sources may shift to incorporate much higher levels of renewable energy. A growing digital economy powered exclusively by electricity, coupled with a rapid transition from fossil fuel to electric fuel for transportation(link is external) and housing could substantially increase the demand for electricity in urban areas. At the same time, declining costs of decentralized and distributed energy systems could reinforce urban energy security and pave the way for cities to reach their climate change targets. The installation of in-home batteries and renewable energy sources (solar or wind power) on private homes, public buildings and infrastructure facilities (such as warehouses and factories), and the use of vehicle-to-grid technology(link is external) could eliminate concerns over managing peak demand and allow power exchanges between households. This shift may increase pressure on centralized power utility companies to adopt a business model focused on decentralized energy systems with multiple owners.
At the Supervisors meeting of Oct 24, they adamantly denied the accusation that they had effectively let Invenergy and MidAmerican Energy write the Palo Alto County Wind Energy Ordinance. However, documents obtained by way of the Iowa Open Records Act indicate otherwise. The original ordinance, written Aug 11, 2016, clearly did not meet with Invenergy’s and MidAmerican Energy’s approval. In a memo from Invenergy and MidAmerican Energy to the Supervisors dated Aug 26, 2016, the company states, “there are some key provisions that must be changed if the county desires to attract and encourage the development of wind energy conversion systems” Following are some specific examples comparing the original ordinance with the one modified to meet Invenergy’s demands.
Compliance with Palo Alto County Zoning Ordinance: Original: “requirement to obtain a certificate of zoning compliance in accordance with Article 9, Section 5 of the Palo Alto County Zoning Ordinance.” – Modified: zoning compliance eliminated.
Setbacks from Permanent Residential Dwellings: Original: 2640 ft.- Modified: 1500 ft.
Setbacks from Property Lines: Original: 1000 ft. – Modified: 120% of height of wind device (approximately 600 ft).
Setbacks of Wind Energy Accessory buildings from permanent residential dwellings: Original: 2640 ft. – Modified: 1500 ft.
Shadow Flicker: Original: “No wind energy conversion system shall be installed in any location where shadow shall fall on any existing residential structures.” – Modified: “The owner-developer shall use shadow flicker computer modeling to estimate the amount of shadow flicker anticipated before mitigating any of it.” (How reassuring it is to learn that how I feel about my health will be determined by an energy company’s computer model.)
Drainage Systems: Original: “Permit required if underground electrical construction activity spans across organized drainage districts and private tile systems. – Modified: No permit required for affecting private tile systems.
These are just some of the many changes demanded by Invenergy and MidAmerican Energy to increase the profitability of their project. Clearly most of the Supervisors, with assistance from other county employees, capitulated to every demand, without considering residents who are adversely affected by the project, and who elect and pay these county officials to look after their well-being.
Instead, these same officials have forfeited the health, environment, and homes of some of their constituents to generate huge profits for companies like Invenergy, Mid-American Energy and its billionaire investors like Warren Buffet, and large wealthy landowners, most of whom are absentee. Nearly all major projects such as this involve costs and downsides, as well as any benefits. In this case there are many downsides, starting with the ill health effects on humans caused by shadow flicker, audible noise, and worst of all, infrasound, which can cause stress, sleeplessness, and nausea. Further, there can be adverse effects on farm animals as well. Also, wind turbines can kill many birds, especially when placed too close to lakes and wetlands. Therefore, it is so important to follow regulations and perform due diligence, neither of which has been undertaken by our county officials.
Credit: The Intelligencer | December 20, 2017 | ~~
Experience is something you get right after you need it. On the heels of a potent, jam-packed rally in Milford to implore the government to pack up its turbines and go home, the bitter aftertaste and lingering sting of feeling deceived and betrayed remains ours to mourn and avenge.
When you think about it, the optics of investing in wind turbines can be construed as a patriotic opportunity to demonstrate support for green energy when better options may exist, but this turbine project is lead contender for first place as a blue ribbon colossal failure.
Clearly, Premier Wynne doesn’t want to be confused with facts, she has already made up her mind. Wynne is at the helm of The Ontario Green Energy Act – the largest transfer of wealth in Canadian history, and as it crosses the performance finish line, it’s lagging behind, Wynne thinks it came in first. As recited in quote after quote: The net result is this is the most over- priced, inefficient, redundant, useless subsidized wind power electricity in North America, never mind Ontario. All supply with no demand. Ontarians have an abundant supply of apologies and Mea Culpa’s from the Ontario Energy Minister for “sub- optimal outcomes”.
The notion of erecting seven 480’ turbines in Milford is just plain ludicrous, although the reality is easily heard by the heavy, gravel- laden trucks barreling down County Road 13 providing thunderous, early morning wake- up calls. The ugly esthetics beginning to sprout will impose a fire sale price tag for potential business investors in Milford and has struck fear in seniors inflicted with depressed residential land values while huddled beneath the looming white elephants. This is the Canadian government that has shoved its citizens to the sidelines to put up and shut up while they impose incompetent, environmental destruction upon a gentle community.
The knights of South Marysburgh tilting at wind turbines are growing in numbers scattered across the belly of South Bay in a mission to quash the project. Appointing Milford for monolithic wind turbines flies in the face of all that is naturally beautiful, peaceful and harmonious in the County. The 800- miles of shoreline tucked into warm, white sand dunes, tropically- hued waters, wine, food, farming, olive oil, maple syrup and bursting with artistic bounty is sacrilegious.
While defending both professional and personal scrutiny, perhaps Mayor Quaiff has the right idea, attacking the issue from within? After all, one of the most successful strategies every employed is “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”.
Milford owns the mouth’s that roar “we are mad as hell and won’t take it anymore” and it has fallen on the selected hearing of Wynne. Steve Ferguson closed his speech at the APEC annual general meeting last Sunday, quoting McGuinty “they (the public) can’t stay mad at us forever”. In Milford, Ontario, those are fighting words.
“As a result of the province’s robust supply situation and flat yearly demand for electricity, the procurement phases of the IESO’s Feed-in-Tariff (FIT) and microFIT programs have come to an end. These programs have been instrumental in helping Ontario establish the clean energy supply mix it has today.”
IESO December 12th, 2017: Ontario’s electricity system ready for winter
Door closes on procurement of new FIT & microFIT contracts for renewable energy in Ontario
Good riddance and don’t let the door hit you on your way out! Now to move onto the next order of business-canceling existing wind power contracts and halting construction of additional projects.
We were both astonished and upset to read the article printed on December 1st, accusing communities fighting wind turbine developments as being funded by the nuclear and fossil fuel industry. Nothing could be further from the truth!
We have seen first hand the struggle these communities face in raising the necessary funds to fight these industrial developments in the courts, through individual donations, taking out loans and organising community fundraisers.
It is the wind farm industry itself, which has become a ‘vested interest,’ relying on subsidies, grants and tax payer’s money. The recent report painstakingly researched by Wind Aware Ireland shows that the wind industry is costing us €1.2 billion annually as a nation.
In return for this, they have failed to significantly reduce our carbon emissions. It must also be realised that wind energy generates electricity, which accounts for only 20% of this country’s total carbon emissions.
Wind farms have become the easy option as the developers and investors are guaranteed profits through the Renewable Energy Feed-In Tariff (REFIT), which subsidises them and is paid for out of the PSO levy on each ESB bill. Central government has failed to do any cost-benefit analysis of the wind farm sector, to see if it is of any benefit to the country.
Meanwhile, rural communities have to stand up to these inappropriately-sited wind farm developments. Once they are built, they will provide no employment for the area and instead will reduce property values, keep tourists away and depopulate our countryside further.
There is also a growing body of evidence that ultra and infra sound generated by turbines have significant health effects on local residents. Most other countries have increased the regulations about the siting of wind farms, while in Ireland we are still subject to 10-year-old guidelines, made when turbines were one third of their present height.
Successive governments have promised to update these guidelines, but so far have failed to change them. We believe we have to look beyond the stranglehold of the wind lobby to other more effective ways of meeting our CO2 targets, including a mix of other renewables and a concerted effort to reduce our energy consumption.
Yours sincerely, Tony Miller & family,
Dunmanway. Ireland
TORONTO – Soaring power prices, wind farms imposed on places that don’t want them and now this: Ontario consumers being dinged by power companies for things such as raccoon traps, scuba gear and staff car washes.
Zapped before by the province’s spending watchdog for its handling of the energy file, Ontario’s Liberal government — heading into an election year — took it on the chin again Wednesday in Auditor General Bonnie Lysyk’s annual report, which found ratepayers have footed the bill for up to $260 million in ineligible expenses under a provincial program that puts the producers on standby to generate power.
She also found ratepayers are paying the cost for large industrial companies’ electricity savings, and that Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) hasn’t implemented repeated recommendations from the Ontario Energy Board, including one that could save ratepayers $30 million a year.
Lysyk’s latest report looked at a program that pays power generators for fuel, maintenance and operating costs when the IESO puts them on standby to supply energy. Nine generators claimed up to $260 million in ineligible costs between 2006 and 2015, Lysyk said.
About two-thirds of that has been paid back.
One natural gas plant in Brampton “gamed” the system for about $100 million, the energy board, the province’s regulator, has reported.
Generators claimed thousands of dollars a year for staff car washes, carpet cleaning, road repairs, landscaping, scuba gear and raccoon traps, “which have nothing to do with running power equipment on standby,” Lysyk wrote.
One company claimed about $175,000 for coveralls and parkas over two years, she said.
“The program was such that bills could be submitted but without any support for the bills and the bills were being paid, and it wasn’t until more requests were made for detailed information that (the IESO) became aware that there were costs behind that bill that probably shouldn’t be reimbursed,” Lysyk said.
Lysyk had previously skewered the Liberals over electricity, concluding customers paid $37 billion for the government’s decisions to ignore its own planning process for new power projects, and that a $2-billion smart meter program spent double its projected costs and didn’t ensure conservation goals were met.
Her conclusions about the smart meter program led then-energy minister Bob Chiarelli to say the auditor’s numbers were less credible than his because the electricity system is complex and difficult to understand. Lysyk spent 10 years working at Manitoba Hydro.
The program to pay costs when energy suppliers are put on standby began in 2003, when Ontario’s electricity grid had supply issues, but now the province has surplus power.
I got back from Iraq in 2007 with two turbines within 1,000′ across the road on a neighbor’s property. Then the noise started, followed by shadow flicker when fall rolled around. I contacted my Jackson County Minnesota planning & zoning director who said everything was done to state specifications. He gave me the contact information to the company that was managing the wind turbines. That started a long battle with are they noisy, how noisy are they, there is no way to accurately test them, etc.
I have seen some right things and some wrong things in my 56 years in this country and 29-1/2 years in the National Guard. This whole wind power scam is just plain wrong. I feel there should be a national class action lawsuit on this issue, and frankly am surprised there hasn’t been one. The problem is there are those that think this is “green” energy, while the rural residents are tortured every single day by noise pollution and shadow flicker to name a couple. There is a “wind farm” in the planning process and the high pressure salesman talked to my brother three times getting the same answer: no. Then he had the gall to stop at my place.
I have always wanted this cartoon to be drawn up as I feel they are trampling the little guy and his family out here, making their acreages unlivable as mine is. So I had my sign maker draw it up, changed a few things here and there and had it published. I feel if I can prevent one person or family from going through the torture and hell I have gone through the last ten years, it will be worth it. As citizens we expect our government to take care of us and look out for our best interests. It has failed in the past with arsenic, asbestos, DDT, lead in paint, pipes and gasoline, Agent Orange and who knows how many other things they thought were safe to begin with. I think wind turbines fit right in the same category.
Ryerson University has decided to decommission all 6 wind turbines in its Wind Tech research project. In 2009 the project was awarded 729, 771 from the Canada Foundation for Innovation. The rest of the 1.8 million in project funding coming from the Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation, Ryerson and the Canadian industry.
“Wind power is associated with three difficult problems: wind is unpredictable, inconsistent and the energy it produces cannot be dispatched on demand.”
Bhanu Opathella, Ryerson researcher
I have heard the stock statement answers from the premier, MOECC minister, his staff, Chatham-Kent mayor and council, municipal administration and the main owners of the North Kent wind farm that it is making me sick.
These stock answers are:
–We take the concerns about ground water seriously.
–We take a very cautious, scientifically-based approach when setting standards for renewable energy projects to protect the health of the Ontario people.
–Pile driving vibrations do not affect water wells.
–Our Government is committed to clean energy.
The concerns of residents in some of the affected areas in the former Dover Township have been made aware to the Ministry in 2012. The problem arose in the former Chatham Township shortly after pile driving started in June of this year, just as was predicted by Water Wells First, based on what had happened in Dover which has the same Kettle Point Black Shale in the aquifer. MOECC’s solution was to take turbidity tests which represents the clarity of water and not the heavy metals that are being carried in the water, some visible and some only visible under a microscope.
Dr. Colby states that the lead, arsenic mercury and uranium carried in the particles in the water will not render it unsafe. At the same time, he refuses to touch or have it tested and certainly would not drink it.
Scientific based approaches are as effective as is intended by those doing the testing.
I saw a vibration monitor on the Centre Side Road that was affixed to a well casing, which is not in contact with the bedrock, with a hose clamp that was not tightened to hold it tightly against the casing to pick up vibration. In addition, it was less then 100 meters from the road and at least 550 meters from the pile driving site. Does it seem reasonable to have a busy road between the site monitored and the sensor? Does it seem reasonable that no analysis is being done on the black matter suddenly appearing in wells that have been pristine for decades? Is that what a scientifically based cautious approach is all about?
So, computer models and engineer’s theory say that pile driving does not affect water wells! No one has heard of a major water well problem for years, yet within two or three months of pile driving at least 16 water wells have been adversely affected. Engineer’s theory also said that the Titanic was unsinkable. Engineer’s theory and model said that the O ring in the Challenger space shuttle was adequate, but its failure caused an explosion and a major crisis in the USA space program. There is precedence for engineer’s theories and models for being wrong. Could this be another? Does actual observation not have preference over theory?
Our government is committed to clean energy apparently at the cost of water wells. Perhaps if the following questions were answered, it would shed some light on why they have this commitment.
How much money was paid by the wind industry to individuals, political parties and the Ontario government for the privilege of building turbines in Ontario without interference?
How much money was paid by the wind industry to individuals and the municipality to become friendly hosts for turbine construction?
How much money would it take to stop construction and stop operation of turbines until their negative impact on environment issues, especially water, are properly assessed by an independent party, since our politicians, local and provincially, obviously had not done “due diligence” prior to signing the agreements?
Are the citizens of this province being used as pawns in a system that is broken? Are some ministries, such as MOECC, actually company self-monitoring agencies that are incorrectly being paid by our tax dollars rather then the companies that they refuse to police. How do we change things? Is common sense dead?
Credit: The Intelligencer | December 20, 2017 | ~~
Ryerson University has decided to decommission all 6 wind turbines in its Wind Tech research project. In 2009 the 
Mothers Against Wind Turbines Inc. 