Daily Archives: December 31, 2011

Wind turbine study timing curious

by J. Morris, Ingersoll Times
The Ontario government’s December 16 press release relates to a report commissioned by the Ministry of the Environment and written by HGC, an engineering firm. The timing of this press release is curious, as it appears the same report was in draft form in August 2010 then submitted as a Final Draft December 2010 by the MOE as evidence during the Environmental Review Tribunal and finally to the public in August 2011. Why would it suddenly warrant a press release in December 2011? Could it be an attempt to divert attention from the upcoming appeal hearing in the Watford area for the Zephyr wind project?

Statements about ‘no direct health effects’ are a red herring, because it is acknowledged by international experts (including experts called upon by the MOE and wind energy proponents) that wind turbines cause adverse health effects via the ‘indirect’ pathway. Even Mr. Howe (of HGC) acknowledged under oath at the 2011 Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) that indirect effects are still ‘something that can occur’.

The press release raises a number of questions:

– When it comes to health, why is the government commissioning reports and relying on information generated by an engineering firm, who is a member of the Canadian Wind Energy Association?

– Why are desk top literature reviews still the government’s method of choice to address concerns rather than properly designed independent field epidemiology studies performed by qualified epidemiology experts?

– Why was the press release issued now, when the referenced report was compiled in 2010?

The press release and report unfortunately do no justice to the families who have already been impacted and displace from their homes at projects throughout the province due to adverse health effects.

It is important to reiterate that, after weeks of testimony from experts around the world in 2011, the Environmental Review Tribunal for the Kent Breezes project concluded:

“This case has successfully shown that the debate should not be simplified to one about whether wind turbines can cause harm to humans. The evidence presented to the tribunal demonstrated that they can, if facilities are placed too close to residents. The debate has now evolved to one of degree.”

J. Morris, Woodstock

Wind Turbine Letters to the Ed. (LFPress)

In his letter, “Wind Trumps Nuclear”, Gideon Forman shows that he doesn’t understand the anger that has been directed against wind turbines in this province. None of the protest groups has ever claimed that wind power is worse for your health than coal or nuclear. But because wind is safer, Forman seems to think Ontarians should happily allow industries to put windmills wherever they wish, to let the provincial government continue to trample on individual and municipal rights, to ignore declining property values due to nearby windmills, and to ignore any possible link between windmills and repeated cases of ill health.

I find it apalling that an association of physicians is willing to allow the health risks that seem to follow windmills. Doctors in Ontario, the US and Europe have all recommended that windmills be set back far more than Ontario’s 550 meters. The French Academy of Medicine recommends 1500 meters, and some American doctors recommend 2000 meters or more. Given the correlation between windmills and stories of poor health, even if there is not yet a proven direct link, any group of physicians worthy of the name should at least be pushing for more than 550 meters between windmills and houses. It is unacceptable that the best the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment can do is to advocate that we let people suffer for the common good.

Adam Shirley, London
December 28, 2011

—————————–

Wind energy can kill you

In response to the letter by Gideon Forman, Wind trumps nuclear (Dec. 26): Forman mention’s “the new study,” but gives no indication of what the study is or who conducted it. He goes on to say: “Windmills produce no smog, no acid rain, no toxic ash, no radioactive waste, no cancer.”

I wonder if Forman has ever looked into how these structures are produced and from what they are produced, what their longevity is and what happens to them when they fail. His letter is about as far from accurate as one could get.

Many of Ontario’s residents are reporting health problems they claim are caused by wind-turbine syndrome, but letters such as Forman’s suggest they are all liars or possibly, it’s in their heads. There are way too many persons claiming ill effects by wind turbines, so dismissing them all is not credible.

Green energy? Hogwash.

The only thing green about wind-generated electricity is all the extra green each Ontarian has to pay for this “green energy.” Wind is notoriously unreliable, blowing when not needed and needed when not blowing – which means if the so-called non-green production is cut too much, we’ll not have the capacity needed to heat or cool our homes during severe periods of weather, resulting in the death of vulnerable people when the power fails.

Ian Tuck, Exeter
December 29, 2011

Lambton Cty- huge solar, wind developments AND T.O.’s Gas plant?

Just wondering how many massive wind and solar developments are proposed for Toronto? How about GAS plants? Hmmmm. Well, apparently Lambton County may have to welcome all three, even if  T.O. doesn’t want them. And a massive landfill dump or two too. Wonder why we aren’t too happy out here Dalton???

 Lambton coal plant could be converted

POWER GENERATION: The coal-fired station may be a candidate for natural gas after construction of a Toronto plant was stopped

By PAUL MORDEN, QMI Agency

SARNIA – The next 12 months could determine if Ontario’s coal-fired power plant near Sarnia has a future.

Ontario Power Generation’s Lambton station in Courtright is scheduled to close in 2014, as Ontario’s Liberal government makes good on its promise – delayed several times – to phase out production of electricity from coal-fired power plants.

But the idea of converting the facility to a cleaner-burning fuel hasn’t been ruled out.

“Ontario Power is investigating the conversion of its coal-fired unit to clean fuels, including natural gas and biomass,” said Paul Gerard, a spokesperson with Ontario’s Ministry of Energy.

“No decision has been made on conversion at the Lambton Generating Station.” Read the rest of this entry