[Following is a comment (slightly edited) submitted to the Whig Standard recently by Ian Dubin, who was qualified as a presenter and expert witness in the Ostrander Point ERT appeal. He is a civil / geotechnical engineer with additional qualifications in law and environmental impact assessment, and with decades of experience in the field of environmental protection.]
I was very pleased to see the Ostrander Point Environmental Review Tribunal Appeal decision. I am especially happy that my small contribution apparently helped the ERT to determine that the proposed Industrial Wind Energy project will cause unacceptable harm to the natural environment, in particular the Provincially threatened Blanding’s Turtle. This is a milestone decision – and I can only hope it helps open the door to more successful appeals against Industrial Wind Energy in Ontario.
However, this is a very narrow victory and I was less pleased that appeal evidence of other…
View original post 1,107 more words
Fellow APPEC Members:
On August 2 APPEC filed a Notice of Appeal to the Divisional Court of Ontario challenging the Environmental Review Tribunal’s decision on human health. Due to the long weekend the board delayed issuing the news release below until today.
The grounds for appeal of all ERT decisions are perceived errors in law. APPEC’s Notice (attached) states: “ The Tribunal erred in law and/or acted unreasonably by failing to apply the appropriate standard of proof in assessing the Appellant’s evidence, and thereby misinterpreting and misapplying the criteria established under section 145.2.1(2)(a) of the EPA.” Specifically, it erred in finding that that the evidence did not establish a causal link between wind turbines and either direct or indirect serious harm to human health at the 40 dBA limit or at 550-m setbacks.
Despite filing an appeal by the statutory deadline, the board continues to review the grounds because this is another expensive legal undertaking and carries with it the liability for costs. Gilead Power, in its Notice of Appeal, is seeking costs from the Prince Edward County Field Naturalists. The APPEC board therefore wants to be fairly certain of the potential for a positive outcome and especially of APPEC’s capability to oppose all wind development in the County. Since an appeal on health applies to every Ontario wind project, it is part of APPEC’s strategy in fighting wpd.
The next stage of the appeal process requires APPEC to clarify its legal arguments within 30 days. During this time the board will be consulting further with our lawyer as well as watching the progress of other relevant Ontario legal cases, two of which involve a Canadian Charter of Human Rights challenge.
In making a decision to proceed with the appeal the board would find it useful to hear from APPEC members. Please reply with your own views this week so the board can gauge the extent of member support.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 6, 2013
ALLIANCE TO PROTECT PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY
Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County appeals Environmental Tribunal Decision on health
Picton, Ontario/ The Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County (APPEC) announced today they have filed an Appeal to the Ontario Divisional Court of the recent Environmental Review Tribunal Decision (ERT) on serious harm posed to human health by a wind turbine development at Ostrander Point, in Prince Edward County.
According to APPEC legal counsel, Eric Gillespie, this Appeal is based on alleged errors in law found in the ERT July 3, 2013 Decision on APPEC’s Appeal of the Renewable Energy Approval issued to Gilead Power by the Ministry of the Environment.
For more information please contact: Ian Hanna (416) 988-4007
May 28, 2013 – Paul Crowe
Wind energy presents a troubling issue for environmentalists. A true environmentalist is expected to support certain things, yet they are split on this issue. It’s what happens if you label something “green” instead of examining it carefully with serious and open questions. It also presents an opportunity for everyone to see you don’t have to think like a group, you can have a healthy concern for the environment without accepting some set list of beliefs that all environmentalists supposedly share. This may be the best thing that has happened for a very long time to advance clear thinking about the environment and it may open up a whole new set of ideas and solutions where people sometimes at odds can begin to agree. Wouldn’t that be refreshing?
Check it out and help spread the word!
“Join us Thursday, August 8, at 3 pm ET for a Google+ Hangout on wind energy in America. During the Hangout, you’ll have the opportunity to ask experts from across the industry anything you want about the wind industry — from the status of offshore wind projects to projections for industry growth to the logistics for setting up your own small turbine to power your home. For the first time ever, we’re also giving you the opportunity to join our Hangout on Air live and ask your wind energy questions directly to our panelists.
For a chance to be featured during the live discussion, submit your questions by emailing email@example.com, posting a comment on the Energy Department’s Facebook or Google+ page, or tweeting @ENERGY using #AskEnergy.”
A recent study by Civitas, The Institute for the Study of Civil Society, points out that wind farms actually produces more CO2 and related pollutants than would be used, if wind turbines were left running on grid power at all times.
The necessity of constantly turning on wind turbines when the wind is favourable, and off when the velocity is too high, along with the grid power necessary to maintain them, actually causes the operation of wind farms to produce more pollution than if the turbines used the grid to operate constantly.
Each time the grid is used to start turbines on a wind farm, a surge of electricity is needed to power up the fossil fuel station where the power originates. Thus, more CO2 and pollution is released into the atmosphere than there would normally be if the wind turbines either operated fully on the grid or were removed from it altogether.
Ruth Lea, author of the Civitas report states that by having to constantly switch on and off power from the grid to operate and maintain wind turbines, drastically increases CO2 and pollution levels above that, which would be produced if the turbines were always on grid power. They go on to say wind turbines only produce energy around 30% of the time, in a small window when the wind is favorable for operation. Thus, the other 60% is being supplied by the grid. Continue reading at:
Colin Graf, Toronto Star
SARNIA, ONT.—Lawsuits, marches and public meetings — these are the new signs of summer in rural Ontario as energy companies advance their plans for hundreds of wind turbines across the province. Opponents of large-scale wind farms gathered for a public meeting in the 600-seat Imperial Theatre in Sarnia on Wednesday night, designed to “bring what everyone thinks is a rural issue to the city,” said organizer Ingrid Willemsen. “In the city people don’t think this affects them, but everyone in Ontario will be paying double on their energy bills soon,” she said, predicting inefficiencies in wind power production.
Willemsen hopes educating urban residents about the costs and health effects of wind turbines will get them contacting the province and increase pressure to stop wind farms. The Sarnia meeting could convince other rural wind opponents to stir up their city cousins, she added. “This could be duplicated in London…
View original post 110 more words
July 29, 2013 – Forbes – James Taylor
A newly published peer-reviewed study reports U.S. wind turbines kill 1.4 million birds and bats every year, even while producing just 3 percent of U.S. electricity. The numbers reveal that President Obama’s global warming plan will kill hundreds of millions of birds and bats while doing little if anything to reduce global temperatures.
Even if no new wind turbines are ever built, turbine blades will slice 14 million birds and bats to death in mid-flight during the next decade. However, global warming alarmists say we must reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 50 or even 80 percent. President Obama’s recently announced assault on climate change appears likely to seek such numbers. Given that most global warming alarmists also vigorously oppose hydropower, natural gas power and nuclear power, reducing emissions by 50 to 80 percent would require increasing the number of wind turbines roughly 25 fold. That means killing 350 million birds and bats in the United States every decade. Continue Reading at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/07/29/president-obamas-climate-plan-would-kill-hundreds-of-millions-of-birds-and-bats/