Articles from Ontario
The public has been protesting wind turbines for years now, but a recent story by Global News has revealed government officials failed to investigate, or deferred responding to, the majority of all noise and health complaints lbetween 2006 and 2014. - Colin McConnell Photo Not that the debate needed any more fuel, but local opponents of wind turbines have been given just that.
Of the nearly 3,200 reports, 1,730 didn’t get site visit from ministry staff. Action on another 1,424 incidents was listed as deferred or planned. Only 24 public complaints on wind turbine operations between 2006 and 2014 were given priority status, according to ministry records obtained by Wind Concerns Ontario. Wilson said noise issues were the most common complaint.
This powerful document identifies and explains how the Ontario Government through its Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change dismissed, ignored, and otherwise failed to address thousands of wind turbine noise complaints in the period from 2006 to 2014. Nearly 3,200 reports of noise complaints were made during that time and in more than half the cases, the government took no action. The wind power industry was virtually self-regulating as the Ministry relied on predicted noise modeling to determine compliance rather than actual measurements. An excerpt of the report released by Wind Concerns Ontario is provided below. The full report can be accessed by clicking the links on this page.
If Iberdrola proceeds with Horse Creek, the project will become embroiled in a contentious and costly administrative law proceeding. Iberdrola will use the procedural advantages of Article 10 to oppose Home Rule and attempt to override opposition from residents, local governments and other project stakeholders.
The world’s biggest wind-turbine company has filed lawsuits against five rural governments because they stand between it and millions in tax subsidies.
“The Tribunal decision has made it clear that this wind power project was never about protecting the environment,” said Jane Wilson, president of Wind Concerns Ontario, the coalition of community groups concerned about wind power projects. “The wind power project was always about money. The citizens of Prince Edward County fought hard to protect the environment and wildlife against our own Ministry of the Environment.”
On Wednesday, April 26, the Environmental Review Tribunal finally issued their decision on the Remedy phase of the hearing into the WPD 27 turbine project proposed for the south shore of the County. The decision on remedy comes after last year’s finding of serious and irreversible harm to Little Brown Bats and Blanding’s turtles in the main hearing of the Hirsch and APPEC appeals.
The partial sinking of a barge that was to be used in the construction of the Amherst Island wind energy project is reason enough to stop the project, a Prince Edward County environmental group says.
Only in Kathleen Wynne’s Ontario would we still be spending money we don’t have, to build wind farms few people want, to generate electricity we don’t need.
The group fighting a wind energy project on Amherst Island is calling for the Ontario government to cancel the contract with the company and called on the province's auditor general to look into the project.
Chatham-Kent-Essex MPP Rick Nicholls is sounding the alarm over Chatham-Kent’s plan to invest nearly $8 million into the North Kent 1 Wind Turbine project.
A year after it was approved by the province, residents of a London-area rural township are still fighting against a wind farm that’s going ahead despite an overwhelming local vote against such projects. ...“Everything about it is a slap in the face, especially when you look at what is happening to our hydro bills,” said Dave Congdon of Dutton Dunwich Opponents of Wind Turbine
The developers of the Otter Creek Wind Farm Project are taking a proactive step to address concerns raised in the community regarding the potential impact wind turbine construction can have on water wells.
Kevin Jakubec, spokesperson for Water Wells First, told the crowd he and a few other residents have found turbidity tests done by AECOM, the firm hired to do baseline well testing for the wind developer, don’t seem to be accurate. “It seems to be extremely inaccurate,” he added.
Jane Wilson, president of Wind Concerns Ontario, a coalition of groups opposed to wind farm development, said the Western study shows local support of a wind farm should be required before any project is approved. “Municipalities should be able to say no, which is not allowed by the province. The Green Energy Act was written for the wind power industry and not the people of Ontario,” she said.
The board of Niagara-on-the-Lake Hydro (NOTL) released a statement Wednesday that asked Ontario Energy Minister Glenn Thibeault to kill the Feed-in-Tariff (FIT) 5 program — the latest round of renewable energy procurement — arguing it will further drive up already expensive electricity rates.
He said hydro costs are being driven up by long-term contracts that pay high prices to producers of renewable energy. Many of those contracts were signed with wind energy producers in Southwestern Ontario, home to the province’s largest wind farms and largest number of wind turbines. “I think they should cancel some of these contracts and not just extend them,” said Macartney.
As long as people have health concerns while living close to wind turbines, the wind energy company shouldn’t be putting money into the community, said Gary Fohr, a member of the community liaison committee related to two wind energy projects in Grey Highlands. “We don’t want their money . . . I don’t see a reason why somebody from Flesherton would show up looking for that money."
Thibeault says the government must move away from setting targets for specific types of energy – such as wind, solar, hydro and nuclear – and should instead focus on implementing a system in which energy producers compete for electricity contracts. "...allocating the precise mix of technology types has largely been arbitrary and led to sub-optimal siting, uncompetitive prices, and heightened community concern.”