Category Archives: Uncategorized

Legal proceedings commenced

Press Release:  APPEC

October 11, 2017   Prince Edward County, Ontario

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.

A New Enemy To Unite Us

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)–

 

 

Wind Turbines Never Considered in Property Assessment

Dave Hemingway of Huron County has been battling the powers that be over impacts of wind turbines in relationship to his property’s assessment.  His ongoing battle has taken years and has hit many roadblocks.  One major barrier he claims is the failure of  MPAC to consider impacts of wind facility infrastructure by instructing its assessors not to consider how close the wind turbines  are when making an assessment.

MPAC (Municipal Property Assessment Corporation)  has continued to hold fast to its official line that industrial wind turbines have no measureable impacts on the values for properties in close proximity to wind turbines. It uses several reports to bolster its current stance.

image

Huron Resident Wants Turbines Considered In His Property Assessment

A Goderich Township residents says a hearing over his right to challenge his assessment that has gone on for about six years, could have been resolved much sooner.

Dave Hemmingway outlined his position Wednesday at a hearing in Clinton.

He said his main contentions include the fact that proximity to wind turbines was never considered in his assessment.

Hemmingway added he has recorded testimony that assessment officers were specifically told not to consider proximity to wind turbines.  He also contends that assessment officers did not have the proper training to do their jobs.

Hemmingway questioned the legality of much of the written material turned over by MPAC because there is no signature on it.  He also stated the chair of one board actually signed a document six months after she had left the board.

Following the Clinton hearing, Hemmingway said he doesn’t know when he’ll get a ruling.

READ ARTICLE

Scottish Wind Power Company Attempts to Cover Up Turbine Collapse

STOP THESE THINGS

For their eyes only: another ‘rare’ turbine collapse.

***

What’s notable about this story is not that a 160 tonne turbine collapsed without warning, nor is it the effort by the wind power outfit’s spin doctor to pretend that this is the first time a 90m tower has taken a tumble to terra firma (a line we demolish, so to speak, below).

No, what is remarkable is their effort to keep a lid on the collapse, only acknowledging it 7 days after the event, and then only because neighbours kicked up a stink.

Safety probe launched after collapse of 480-foot wind turbine in Ayrshire
Daily Record
Stephen Housten
29 January 2017

ENERGY chiefs have launched an urgent probe following the collapse of the 160-ton turbine.

The catastrophic collapse of a giant wind turbine is being investigated.

A 480-foot high turbine came down in a storm – only the second windmill…

View original post 902 more words

Tree Cutting Penalty. A Licence to Kill?

Cedar-Point-Trees-cut-3-1024x768.jpg
Site of unauthorized clear cutting that occurred during construction of Cedar Wind. Lambton County, Ontario

Taking down trees even those under provincial protection is occurring in multiple wind projects and punitive fines are less than a tap on the wrist for offenders.  Cedar Wind construction removed trees and the cost was a mere pittance.

Niagara Wind destroyed well over 7 000 trees including individual trees  estimated to be centuries old including tree species at risk.

1297813168809_ORIGINAL
Old growth tree one of many removed for Niagara Wind. West Lincoln, Ontario

Presentation on trees removed  at Niagara Wind:  https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1widGvicaK-VA1XXB4xC1OBtMlWopYG281sa94LKdktY/edit#slide=id.p3

WPD Wild Turkey Road
Clear cutting for wind development on ecological sensitive and protected Oak Ridges Moraines (head waters location supplying greater Toronto area)

 

Lambton landowner handed $6,000 fine in high- profile woodlot clearing case

By: Barbara Simpson  Sarnia Observer  Published: February 15, 2017

If trees are illegally cut in a woodlot and a fine of a few thousand dollars is handed out, is that enough to deter a landowner from clear-cutting again?

That’s the question several Lambton County politicians are raising after learning the details of the penalty the county leveled at a landowner for removing more trees than permitted during the construction of a Cedar Point wind turbine in 2015.

The high-profile case of clear-cutting – which involved an acre of trees in Lambton Shores – resulted in a fine of $6,000 for the private landowner. That amount was paid in full to the county in early 2016.

While mistakes are bound to happen, Sarnia Mayor Mike Bradley said Wednesday the dollar amount of the penalty was not “punitive.”

“In James Bond, they say it’s a licence to kill. This is a licence to cut.”

READ AT: http://www.theobserver.ca/2017/02/15/lambton-landowner-handed-6000-fine-in-high-profile-woodlot-clearing-case

Toolkit for Turbines

house-surrounded-by-wind-turbines“Pressures to stop (new) wind energy production in Ontario have increased significantly since the controversial GEA. “

Opposition to wind turbines is facing a growing resistance not just in Ontario but globally. The acceptance and excitement over using an alternative way to generate electricity has  given way to the bitter nightmare  faced by abutting residents who are adversely impacted by these massive and intrusive structures. Courts worldwide are increasingly rendering decisions to compensate families and individuals who have been harmed.

The Toolkit document opines (give it a read and try not to choke on the obvious) as to why a few (smaller) turbines in a less densely populated rural area will meet with less resistance than clusters of hundreds (increasingly larger machines) placed adjacent to towns and settled areas.   It is suggested that entering into a more intimate relationship with wind development will mitigate the harms of not being able to give consent.

This is a false and misleading conclusion as landowners who host wind turbines have given witness that they too were harmed even when money was received.

“The ultimate goal is fairer and much less divisive turbine facility siting outcomes when governments and communities themselves decide that turbine development is the policy path they wish to pursue.”  Toolkit for Turbines: Wind Energy Development in Ontario and Nova Scotia, Canada

Harm from wind power will not be remedied with the stated goal. The document fails to address a fundamental flaw in reasoning- which is to examine if turbines justify the negative documented outcomes. Simply put the wind turbines are not fit for purpose. To continue to pursue an energy policy that accepts inflicting harm on a few without remedy and without proven benefits for the greater good is wilful blindness.

protest_02_72cd1___gallery
Protesters demonstrated in Oakville where Premier Kathleen Wynne was the guest speaker at a Chamber of Commerce luncheon.

Have Your Say! Revision of Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006

The Commissioner made it clear that the information should have been made available to the public before any decision was made by the Department. The Commissioner also pointed out that this would enable the public to make submissions before any decisions were made.It is a very sorry state of affairs when a Commissioner has to tell the government how democracy works. Hang your head, Minister Naughten, and off to the Naughty Corner you go.

Source: Have Your Say! Revision of Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006

Canada’s Worst Bat Killing Wind Farm

Wind developers do not have to make the reports filed of bird and bat kills public.  That is now being changed.  It took over one year for the Freedom of Information request made by Esther Wrightman to be delivered. The documents received make sickening reading.

The following copied post highlights just one  of many horrors of the kill rate of wind turbines known by the Ontario government that  until now has been kept hidden from  public scrutiny.

Former Liberal Pres. Crawley built worst ‘bat killing wind farm’ in Canada: 85 bats killed /turbine/yr

Yesterday the CD arrived with loads of Bird and Bat Mortality Reports that I had filed an FOI from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry for last year, and you good people had funded. I’m slowly organizing and will get them all posted shortly.

But for starters I came across five reports for Mohawk Point Wind Project, a 6 turbine project in Haldimand County. I didn’t know much about this one – it was never in the news… sort of flew under the radar. It came on around the time of the Clear Creek turbines in Norfolk County.

This was an AIM PowerGen/International Power Corporation project – whose president is none other than the past Federal and Ontario Federal Liberal Party President Mike Crawley. It was approved  in 2009, and pretty much nothing more was said about it since.

Which is so wrong. Let me explain. The “five” reports stuck out because usually (if the project is not killing over the ‘limits’ set by the government) there are only three reports. That means some ‘mitigation reporting’ was happening, for some reason.

Well that reason became pretty obvious within seconds of looking at the 2011 report.

How does 85.42 bats killed per wind turbine strike you?

Or how about 53.1% of them being the Endangered Little Brown Bat?

Perhaps I’m too soft, but my thinking is 25 bats per turbine is atrocious (I mean, 10 is the MNRF’s limit). And as for Little Browns, they usually only make up a percent or two – not HALF of the kill! It’s an endangered species for crying out loud!

Okay, based on these insane numbers, why didn’t they SHUT DOWN the project? Oh they mitigated instead, and they believe they brought it down to a more reasonably atrocious number of 24.27 bats killed per wind turbine/year by 2013. That puts you all at ease, doesn’t it? I mean shouldn’t we be happy for the success of this ‘mitigation’ even though it is still double the legal limit?

Not so fast. Think about this – female Little Browns have just one offspring a year. After 5 years of 6 turbines decimating 85 bats each (give or take), how many do you really think are left in those local colonies? Pretty damn sure that number is dropping rapidly by the oh-so-natural process of “wind turbine selection”.

And as for you, dear Crawely, at least you have the current claim of creating the biggest bat killing “farm” in the country. Now that should make the green Liberals proud.

Esther Wrightman

[With only an initial look at some reports I hope this is as bad as it gets for bat kills in this country. As the bird and bat mortality reports are slowly uncovered, the numbers just seem to get worse and worse. I never imagined it could get this low, but then again nobody was releasing this info to the public, so how were we to know? Maybe some company will outdo Crawley on this one yet…heck, maybe even some of Crawley’s other projects could claim this title too…]

Mayor asks Ombudsman to investigate Unifor Wind Turbine for Non-Compliance

unifor-wind-turbine-570
Unifor Wind Turbine- Saugeen Shores, Ontario

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.

White Pines Wind Project Remedy Hearing Motions

owl-apaiIt 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.”

Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County

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…

View original post 551 more words