Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Dr Arlene King’

Mayoralty candidate Jim Watson held a rural town hall in North Gower last evening, and discussed several of his campaign ideas especially his idea for a borough system to deal with local issues.

During the question period following his talk, the subject of the proposed industrial wind turbines for North Gower arose. Mr Watson became very firm, and grim, and implied that one of the questioners was opposed to all green energy if she was opposed to wind power. He then laid out his position which was that if the Chief Medical Officer of Health for Ontario said there are no health effects, then there are no health effects.

That’s it.

Of course, Dr King’s “report” (which was simply another review of selected literature–not one actual person was spoken to or interviewed) has been widely criticized and is the subject of a 55-page analysis (available at http://www.windvigilance.com ).

He did say, if elected Mayor, he would consult with the City solicitor about options re: noise bylaws etc to protect residents from excessive noise.

This is an issue that is very important to the residents of North Gower and south Richmond and is worth discussing with Mr Watson in detail; his campaign slogan is that Ottawa deserves better leadership. Indeed we do, and we also deserve a leader who is open to ideas other than the party line of the Ontario Liberal government.

To contact Mr Watson go to his website at http://www.jimwatson.ca

The North Gower Wind Action Group can be reached at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

There is a lot of buzz these days as corporate wind developers are fighting back against the growing resistance to industrial wind turbines on several counts: there are problems for the involuntary neighbours of the machines such as health effects and declining or outright erasure of property values, and on the larger scale, Ontario ratepayers/taxpayers are paying for a technology that simply doesn’t work and can NEVER live up to the promises made for it.

One comment made by the pro-wind faction is that, if wind turbines are so bad, then why don’t we hear from the people who have leased their land for the huge industrial machines. Very simple: their contracts do not allow for them to speak about any aspect of their agreement with the corporate wind developer.

Another comment is that industrial wind turbines are good for farmers. And the answer to that is, no, they’re not. Just listen to the video of a Wisconsin-based farmer who “hosts” three turbines. He says his crops are suffering, his health is suffering, the community has been torn apart, and he goes on to describe a dismal situation. (See the video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzh106w1lRA&feature=player_embedded#!

Again, from Wisconsin, a property owner who says the corporate wind developer told him “bold-faced lies” about the noise. The first day they turned on, he says, “[it sounded like] I had a jet airplane over my house … and it didn’t go away.” He says his community will never be the same, neither will his life: “They stole from me.” His house is for sale. http://www.windaction.org/videos/28235

You may also wish to read the account of a property owner in New York State, who had previously been critical of those opposed to industrial wind turbines. Listen to what he says now: http://www.livinginnewyork.org/cohocton_lessor_hal_graham_complaining_about_noise

And, an Ontario property owner who lives near the International Power Corp “Frogmore Wind project” has just learned that her custom-built dream home is now unsellable and probably worthless. Here’s how she describes the situation in her community:

We, in the Clear Creek/Cultus/Frogmore industrial wind turbine zone who live surrounded within a 3-km radius by 18 Vestas, 1.65 MW IWTs, are a dense enclave of ~ 140 houses, 300 residents of which 70 signed a petition last year saying that they WERE affected by those 18 IWTs. Because we have 10 +/- abandoned houses, 10 +/- vacant houses for sale,
9 +/- occupied homes for sale and 8 seasonal homes, there is much scope for study and research.

That’s 37 families out of 140 who are significantly and negatively affected by 18 industrial wind turbines. (One wonders at the prospect for North Gower: 10 turbines at 2.5 MW and 626 feet tall, located in part of hilly topography that we know from research in other locations has an effect on how and where the noise travels. We also know if the developer gets approval, they won’t stop at 10. While at Clear Creek/Frogmore, homes are within 3 km, in North Gower-Richmond, virtually the entire village, including the public school, will be within 3 km of turbines, based on some maps produced in the past by Prowind.)

All this for wind power which can barely squeak out megawatts of power, and at best operates at below 30% capacity. Right now, 10:30 a.m. on July 13, on Wolfe Island where residents say the quality of life has been utterly lost, the turbines are generating 59 MW out of a capacity for 185 MW. At Amaranth, the output is ZERO (capacity 200 MW).

What it does produce is profits for the corporate wind developers.

What can you do?

-Let your City Councillor and MPP know that you want the City of Ottawa (or your city, wherever you are) to get control of development BACK; it was taken away by the Green Energy Act.

-Learn more about industrial scale wind power

-Learn more about how electricity is generated, marketed and sold in Ontario—it’s a worrying situation.

-DEMAND that the Chief Medical Officer of Health for Ontario put aside her report published in May, and undertake new, proper health research together with the Ontario Research Chair, Dr Sivo Sivoththaman (For details, see http://northgowerwindturbines.wordpress.com )

To contact the North Gower Wind Action Group email northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

and check out news stories daily at http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com

Read Full Post »

Doctors who were involved in the review of the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health’s report on industrial wind turbines and health effects, say that information about health effects was in the version they reviewed … but was taken out. Probably for political reasons.

Interesting. The full article is here.

http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2609375

And, here:

Wind turbine report missing community impact section

Posted By Paul Jankowski

Posted 16 hours ago
   

A recent report by Ontario’s chief medical officer of health on the potential health impact of wind turbines was somewhat disappointing not for what it contained, but for what is missing, Dr. Hazel Lynn says.

Lynn, the Grey Bruce medical officer of health, was part of the group that reviewed drafts of the report issued in May by Dr. Arlene King. The report concluded “the scientific evidence available to date does not demonstrate a direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.”

//

Lynn said in a recent interview that while she does not dispute that finding, the final report glosses over the disruption that the introduction of wind turbines can cause in a community.

“The whole section that a couple of us really wanted in there on community health and community disruption went. It’s not in there. I suspect politically she can’t criticize another ministry, so I was a little disappointed,” Lynn said.

“I think it’s a fair comment that there is other material that could have been in the report and wasn’t,” said Dr. Ray Copes, the director of environmental and occupational health at the Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion and another member of the committee that reviewed drafts of the report.

Copes said there are “really important and quite legitimate” questions about wind farms that he and Lynn thought should be discussed, but “I guess the CMOH’s report wasn’t the place for it.”

King could not be reached for comment on Friday but Andrew Morrison, a spokesman for the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, said the report “reflects the consensus of the panel that Dr. King put together to look at this issue.”

The report does conclude, among other things, that “community engagement at the outset of planning for wind turbines is important and may alleviate health concerns about wind farms.”

“Basically, I think they (wind farms) disrupt communities if they’re not properly planned and instituted and when you disrupt people’s communities they get sick,” Lynn said. There is evidence to back that position up, she added, but “that doesn’t come through very clearly” in King’s report.

Ontario’s Green Energy Act strips municipalities of control over where wind farms are sited and gives it to the province.

King’s report also states that there “little information is available on actual measurements of sound levels generated from wind turbines and other environmental sources. Since there is no widely accepted protocol for the measurement of noise from wind turbines, current regulatory requirements are based on modeling.”

Read Full Post »

Since our provincial government thought so little of the concerns of dozens of municipalities throughout Ontario, and the people who are suffering because corporate wind developers have built industrial wind turbines too close to homes (in some cases, rendering them uninhabitable so the developers have to buy the properties), we’re not going to spend much time discussing the 14-page report released yesterday by Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health.

It is simply another review, and in many cases the papers reviewed were themselves reviews. It includes the infamous, industry-funded report by Colby, Dobie, Leventhall, et al, which has been roundly discredited as biased and inadequate. It also pointedly includes criticism of the work done by Dr Nina Pierpont (author of Wind Turbine Syndrome).

Here’s the truth: everyone knows that sleep deprivation causes health problems. Everyone knows that constant noise and vibration/soundpressure/infrasound disturbs sleep. If industrial wind turbines are built too close to homes and disturb sleep at night (when they are at their noisiest) then it is more than likely there will be health problems for some people.

Here’s a quote from a 2005 study on traffic noise: “More people are exposed to noise from traffic than from any other noise sources. The degree of noise perception by humans is inflenced by various psychological factors and the syurrounding physical environment. There are numerous health risks due to elevated and prolonged exposure to noise such as irritation, hearing degradation, ability to perceive and process information, sleep deprivation, etc. Lack of sleep has a negative effect on performance,attentiveness and alertness.” (Ilgakojis, Jotautiene et al, 2005. Urban Transport)

That’s just one paper.

The report from the Chief Medical Officer of Health is inadequate, flawed, selective in its sources, and very narrow in its focus. And once again, not a clinical study, i.e., not a single actual person was contacted or examined. And once again, they bring up the idea that if people near wind “farms” felt they were being treated fairly, their “attitudes” would be influenced.

Tax dollars went into the preparation of this “report”. It is indeed a disappointment that it has done nothing to advance experience or knowledge about the important questions concerning industrial wind turbines.

To read the report, go to:

http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/public/publications/ministry_reports/wind_turbine/wind_turbine.aspx

French – http://www.health.gov.on.ca/fr/public/publications/ministry_reports/wind_turbine/wind_turbine.aspx

Read Full Post »