Industrial wind turbines are being pushed by government and wind developers, doing their own studies, to promote their own interests. All of us who are in the line of fire from these gigantic industrial installations seem to be of little concern. Our rural countryside is threatened with industrial wind power installations with minimum setbacks from homes of only 400 meters.

These three letters all respond to recent news reports on the wind energy facility proposed for Amherst Island and the potential of that project exceeding the 88-turbine Wolfe Island facility now under construction.

Wind turbines sound great when you first hear about them. Who is against renewable energy? Farmers who struggle to make a living are eying up the $9,000 they are to receive per turbine per year. Ten turbines is a retirement income of $90,000! Who would blame the farmers! And the Bonnechere and Madawaska township councils can see much-needed tax dollars flowing in. But there are problems with the whole scheme. ...Let's make sure that if we choose to install hundreds of 400- foot high turbines in our heritage countryside we do so from informed choice.

Accompanying the myth that wind turbine energy will replace fossil fuel energy is denial of the ecological impacts and health effects of wind turbines by governments and promoters. The ugly reality is that wind turbines are a serious addition to the industrialization of quiet rural landscapes, places that people have long valued for quality of life, retirement and recreation. The environmental costs imposed on wildlife and people have been systematically ignored by a political and regulatory system that has corrupted individual and societal freedom and environmental integrity by relegating these values to some distant offshoot of economic growth.

Sunday's massive series of explosions at a Toronto propane plant gives credence to every Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) argument posed to this point in time. ...In Barrie, Northern Ethanol's plan to build a plant on the former Molson Brewery site has faced opposition from residents in every part of the city. Opposition to Bob Jackson's plan to built a wind turbine on his Mapleview Drive West Toyota dealership has, conversely, caused mostly local concerns. In both cases, however, opponents fear the worse. ...And everyone is concerned about how it will affect their bottom lines, property values. The point is, the reason people look at worst-case scenarios is that sometimes they happen.

People have been hoodwinked into promoting wind turbine energy as some sort of Nirvana all while human population growth and per capita energy consumption continue to spiral upward. Turbine energy generation is fueling growth in human population and energy consumption and growth in a false "economy". It is NOT doing the opposite. Matching the folly of the energy replacement misunderstanding is denial by governments and promoters of the ecological impacts and health effects of turbines; the ugly reality is that they are a serious addition to the industrialization of quiet rural landscapes that people have long valued for quality of life, retirement, and recreation. ...Wind turbines are an assault on human well being and act to degrade the human "gestalt". Promotion of wind turbine energy is a case of serious misjudgment by those who fraudulently use green wash to promote their commercial aspirations.

Yet the Ontario Government seems to be committed to opening up this sensitive area to the burgeoning wind-farm industry. In a recent report commissioned by the Ontario Power Authority, Georgian Bay has been singled out as an excellent place to locate offshore wind farms. A number of land-based farms have already been proposed along its shoreline.

Is the proposed wind-energy farm on Wolfe Island an example of a community making environmentally sound choices? The honeybee story has made me skeptical. Are decisions being made because they are good for the environment and the residents of Wolfe Island or because the project is going to line the pockets of the people involved? Are people so anxious to make money they won't wait for an environmental assessment? Has anyone taken into consideration the location of the turbines and their impact on the people who live near the site? Do those residents have a say?

One of the reasons we try to minimize damage to the environment is to preserve the pristine and beautiful landscapes with which Ontario is blessed. But the presence of windmills can itself mar such locations. ...Perhaps there are ways that we can locate these electricity factories in areas where they don't detract from the beauty of some of our last wild areas. Maybe there are windy sites along the shores of the Great Lakes where industrial plants are already located. Certainly these windmills are a pleasant diversion from smokestacks and slag. As much as possible, people want their natural sites to remain natural. That doesn't happen when windmills are constructed. Some people think wind power is the perfect environmental energy but, like most things, it has its drawbacks, too.

Gengrowth wind turbines are to be situated in a great monotonous line along the historic Talbot Trail, through Palmyra, Morpeth, and stretching out along the shores of Lake Erie. It is hard to imagine that in 2008, precious land bordering beautiful natural beaches and cliffs of Lake Erie will be dotted with giant wind turbines sweeping the countryside. This is only one of many lines and grids that will weave through, connect, and wind around heritage and cultural landmarks while fencing in small towns and fencing out the natural beauty of rural Chatham-Kent. ...Like Quixote, one cannot help but feel an unsettling and disturbing ill wind brewing. ...Hopefully, there are a few Don Quixotes left. It is important and necessary to fight against the smiling giants of profit and opportunity whose false promises of economic benefits are, in this opinion, full of hot air and come at a great expense. It is time to demand that both the provincial and municipal governments preserve the heritage, and unique cultural and natural assets of Chatham-Kent. It is time to "tilt at windmills."

Editor's note: This letter is addressed to the members of Chatham-Kent council and Mayor Randy Hope. ...I am incredibly shocked and disappointed that people who wish to do business in this community could care so little for the people who live in it. It is appalling to me that a representative of this company could show such disdain and contempt for people that could be potential neighbours. So, I am left with the following questions: Should we find that our quality of life is disturbed, the noise level is greater than expected, our property becomes unsellable and/or devalued or our health is adversely affected, who is liable? Where do we seek recourse?

Chatham-Kent is proud to be known for its farmland, outstanding fishing and hunting and most importantly our quality of life. Now threatening all of this is AIM PowerGen Corp. proposing a possible 100 wind turbine generators and Gengrowth proposing nine wind farms with five wind turbines on each. With government grants and incentives, there will be more. Before we make it easier for them to destroy our quality of life with our tax dollars and by changing existing development bylaws, please stop and consider.

A report commissioned by the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities is going to do very little to settle the debate over just how close wind turbines should be located to homes and it's not likely to be welcomed by those fighting proposed wind farms in their backyards - such as those opposing the plan to erect turbines in the Gulf Shore region of Cumberland County. In the report, consultants Jacques Whitford suggest it should be left up to individual municipalities ...The 117-page report concludes there are no internationally accepted standards for dealing with controversial issues surrounding wind farms, especially when it comes to things like setbacks, the impact on real estate values and noise.

Contrary to what you may have heard, the Great Bear Rainforest is not under attack. Neither is Premier Gordon Campbell backing down from his promise to protect environmentally significant portions of the central coast because the province is considering applications for electrical-power generation in the region. As The Sun's Larry Pynn discovered this week, the province is looking at proposals for a large wind farm and four commercial run-of-the-river power generation projects that have the potential to infringe on either existing or planned conservancies. ...The 2006 legislation defining the conservancies on the central coast specifically forbids "large hydro-electric" developments, but permits run-of-the river projects designed to provide power to local communities not serviced by the provincial power grid. ...But the legislation is silent on wind power and does not specifically forbid transmission lines.

The mad excess in the consumption of energy that characterizes what increasingly appears to be a dying way of life, if not civilization, now desires to replace the humanity that used to fill the countryside, with these great, ugly, threshing monstrosities, assaulting our sight wherever we turn. Our government, led by gregarious, grinning Gary Doer, who never saw an open field he didn't think would be improved by a power-generating windmill, wants to make our province into a powerhouse, largely for American consumption.

But these are early days. It is one thing for St. Leon to play pioneer, to embrace the opportunities that a wind farm presents; it is quite another to force, shame or cajole people to join the pioneers against their wishes, or to expect people who have chosen to behold an open range from their property to give up that view to help electrify the concrete jungle of urban energy users.

Mr. Keller writes about surprise in "extent of the decline" in the production of the province's four wind farms. There is no surprise among those who have studying the bigger industry picture and are not seduced by the exaggerated claims made by the industry and its supporters. Perhaps that surprise comes from the dawning realization that these turbines are not all that they have made out to be....... Wind generation is not even a partial solution to our energy needs, and climate concerns.

At the eleventh hour and at the brink of hard-won success, Maritime Electric "ran the numbers" and decided the bypass they worked with us to secure was too expensive after all. At a meeting on Friday, April 20, I was told that the differential cost was about $75,000. This is approximately 2% of the cost for the entire transmission line expansion, estimated at about $3.75 million. According to government sources, it is less than one half of the amount they spent on a botanical analysis and environmental assessment process (required by provincial policy) to safeguard rare flora and ecologically unstable wetlands/streams. Less than $100, 000 to save a community, and Maritime Electric bows out of a year-long commitment. It beggars the imagination.

From Barton, Vermont, to the German border with Denmark and from the shores of Lake Huron, to the Romney Marches of southern England, wind power advocates are fighting crosswinds from local residents. In Barton in mid-January, a referendum overwhelmingly rejected the wind power turbines that were planned near this upper Vermont community. ...In Germany, where one-third of the world's current wind power is generated, doubters have provoked a loud debate. The company that owns the grid that includes nearly half the wind-farms in Germany reported its wind farms generated only 11 percent of their capacity. The company said the winds vary so much the wind farm had to be backed 80 percent by the conventional power grid.