Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘health effects wind turbines’

From the last edition of Ontario Farmer, Tom van Dusen’s Eastern Limits column, excerpted here.

Powerful people

Power of the People seems to have played a crucial role in the minority Liberal government outcome of the provincial election. Power of the anti-wind people, that is.

An advocacy group called Wind Concerns Ontario (WCO) says it targeted 10 ridings where existing or planned wind farms have become controversial, with an eye to defeating sitting Liberal members who supported the projects, or to getting opposition candidates elected where vacancies existed due to retirement.

It’s hard to know if WCO should get all the credit…but, in fact, Grits were shut out of those ridings.

Some prominent rural Liberals who backed wind and solar energy bit the dust on election day, including two former OMAFRA ministers, Carol Mitchell, who held the post in the last government, and Leona Dombrowsky, the province’s most recent education minister. Both went down to spectacular defeat. Also blown out of his riding was the pre-election environment minister, John Wilkinson, also an outspoken supporter of his government’s green energy policy which offered some subsidies and high energy generation payments to wind and solar power entrepreneurs.

…At the east end of the province, it looks like turbine opponents helped elect Tory Jim McDonell in Stormont-Dundas-South Glegarry which had been vacated by Liberal MPP Jim Brownell. McDonell’s stock seemed to go up after he called upon Dalton McGuinty to stop the proposed South Branch Wind Farm at Brinston before it got to the construction phase. A collection of 14 turbines, South Branch has been promoted by Prowind Canada dating back to 2008. Over the intervening years, there have been scores of meetings and studies about the impact of the project.

For WCO, Prowind is similar to all industrial turbine installations: the advocacy group claims they all threaten human and animal health, habitat, and property values as well as cause noise and aesthetic concerns.

WCO says it set its sights on toppling Liberal candidates because the government “denied science” indicating turbines could be harmful, and refused to accept “local democracy” by pushing forward with turbine projects against the will of residents.

The anti-wind turbine lobby appears to have registered a big blow to the McGuinty Grits. Retaining only a few of the lost 10 seats would have made a difference between majority and the premier’s so-called “major minority”. … the WCO campaign proves resoundingly that taxpayers can have an impact on voting day even if it’s not the ultimate outcome of defeating a government.

“The Liberals have an opportunity to change their course during this minority parliament, act on our concerns and put the interests of people ahead of special interests behind the industrial wind lobby which cost them their majority,” WCO gloated in a news release.

… There’s nothing wrong with modestly encouraging development of new energy sources. However, the last Liberal government seemed to want to make it happen right now at whatever cost, and damn any side effects such as the potential health hazard.

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

Well, we knew that. You can’t keep paying people exorbitant amounts of money for wind and solar, then sell it for a quarter of what you paid—oh, and give away what you don’t need when you have too much on the grid–without prices of energy to consumers going up.

But by how much? Turns out the Ontario government hasn’t been very forthcoming with that information, particularly before the recent provincial election.

Now, a research study details just how bad energy prices could get in Ontario. The forecast is grim: higher electricity costs will result in “energy poverty” which is a killer for small and medium businesses.

A report on the story is here: http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1071332–power-prices-will-rise-steeply-study-says

The North Gower Wind Action Group is a community organization dedicated to providing information about industrial-scale wind power generation, and opposed to inappropriately sited power projects that will be too close to homes and communities.

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

Well, we said you should have listened to your constituents, Von Bommel, Wilkinson, Dombrowsky and the rest. Here is the story:

Anti-wind turbine coalition may have cost McGuinty a majority

 
 
 
By Don Butler, The Ottawa Citizen October 8, 2011
 
 
The Liberals lost 10 seats — almost all in rural Ontario — targeted by the anti-wind coalition Wind Concerns Ontario. Had they retained even one of those seats, they’d have won a majority government.
 

The Liberals lost 10 seats — almost all in rural Ontario — targeted by the anti-wind coalition Wind Concerns Ontario. Had they retained even one of those seats, they’d have won a majority government.

Photograph by: Peter J. Thompson/National Post,

OTTAWA — Did wind turbines cost the Ontario Liberals their majority in Thursday’s provincial election? A close look at the election results suggests it’s more than possible.

The Liberals lost 10 seats — almost all in rural Ontario — targeted by the anti-wind coalition Wind Concerns Ontario. Had they retained even one of those seats, they’d have won a majority government.

Progressive Conservative or New Democrat candidates defeated seven incumbent Liberals, and won three Liberal seats where the incumbent wasn’t running for re-election. All the ridings are home to industrial turbine projects or have active proposals for some.

Three Liberal cabinet ministers from rural Ontario were among the casualties, including Environment Minister John Wilkinson, an outspoken defender of the government’s green energy policy, who went down to narrow defeat in Perth-Wellington. He won the seat by 6,000 votes in 2007.

Leona Dombrowsky, education minister in Dalton McGuinty’s cabinet, lost by 3,000 votes after winning by 6,000 votes in the last election. And Agriculture Minister Carol Mitchell, whose margin of victory in 2007 was 7,000 votes, fell to Tory Lisa Thompson by 4,500 votes in Huron Bruce.

Liberal incumbents also lost in Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock, Lambton-Kent-Middlesex, Northumberland-Quinte West and Algoma-Manitoulin. Conservative candidates won in two open Liberal seats — Chatham-Kent-Essex and Elgin-Middlesex-London, and the NDP picked up Essex.

All 10 seats were targeted by Wind Concerns Ontario, a coalition of wind opponents that claims to have mobilized thousands of volunteers angry at the Liberal government’s embrace of wind power.

“The Ontario Liberals have spent the last two years denying science, refusing to accept local democracy, and tonight they paid a price,” John Laforet, president of Wind Concerns Ontario, said in a news release.

“The Liberals have an opportunity to change their course during this minority parliament, act on our concerns and put the interests of people ahead of the special interests behind the industrial wind lobby that cost them their majority,” Laforet said.

Jane Wilson, chair of the North Gower Wind Action Group, which is fighting a proposed eight-to-10 turbine development near their community, said the election results show “the tide has turned.

“If the Liberal government wants to have good government for all Ontario, they’re going to have to look at the concerns of rural communities,” Wilson said.

She credited Wind Concerns Ontario with connecting concerned residents with other communities already living with wind turbines. “It gave them a kind of cohesion and more information than they would have had just acting on their own.”

The proposed turbine development near North Gower came up repeatedly during the campaign, according to Conservative MPP Lisa MacLeod, who represents the area and opposes the project.

Wilson said the project is still awaiting a contract under the province’s Feed-In Tariff program. “I gather that’s connected to whether there’s transmission capacity,” she said, adding: “We don’t believe there is.”

dbutler@ottawacitizen.com

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/Anti+wind+turbine+coalition+have+cost+McGuinty+majority/5524109/story.html#ixzz1aJDBNC4T

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

But don’t take our word for it.

We could quote you the research studies that have been done–epidemiologist Dr Carl V. Phillips says there are enough of them that it is beyond a shadow of a doubt, and the World Health Organization has documented serious health effects from “environmental noise”—but let’s go to the Township of Amaranth in Ontario.

Almost six years ago now, the Township welcomed industrial wind turbines, believing the promises of jobs and green energy. They thought they were doing the right thing.

How’s that working for them? Not so well.

Here from a letter to the Minister of the Environment from Mayor Don McIver, the results of living with industrial wind turbines on one community.

“There is no question that the impact of wind turbines and the transformer that connects this power to the grid have negatively affected the health and wealth of neighbouring residents. The Council of the Township of Amaranth is opposed to any further wind turbine projects until the negative impacts of the current wind farm are corrected.”

Families have become ill and have had to leave their homes, the Mayor writes; efforts have been made to alleviate the noise and the low frequency sound, and have failed (we know there is no proper methodology to measure turbine noise–all the setbacks etc are based on “modelling”).

“The setbacks in the Green Energy Act are not sufficient to protect the health and wealth of neighbouring families. The 5 km setback in the lake directly invalidates the setback of 550 metres on land.”

Tha Mayor’s letter has never been answered.

For in-person accounts, go to http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/video-testamonies/

to see videos of Ontario residents who have been living next to industrial wind power generation facilities.

This is no joke.

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

Many people believe that because there is a multi-step approval process for wind power projects in Ontario, there must be plenty of authoritative oversight along the way.

No.

First of all, let’s be clear: we are talking about industrial-scale wind power generation here, not the little iconic wind “mills” you used to see on farms in Ontario and which are still used to create power for limited use, like a water pump. That’s as far from the current industrial wind power projects as you can get.

Under the Green Energy and Green Economy Act  or the GEA in Ontario, wind power developers create a proposal for a project, then apply for a Feed In Tariff contract. If they get that (and that process is a whole other story) then they can proceed to preparing a Renewable Energy Application (REA) for submission to the Ministry of the Environment. Their draft REA is reviewed by certain “stakeholders” and then eventually shown to the public for comment. The company is required to hold two information sessions for the public; these are typically merely Open Houses. There is no formal presentation, no question and answer period, and no sign that comments from the public are recorded in any form.

After that, the company submits the REA, gets a Certificate of Approval (the MoE is currently promising a one-month turnaround in the interest of speedy development) after which time the public has 15 days to appeal. As we saw from the Kent Breeze appeal in which a single citizen spent upwards of $150,000 to appeal the Suncor project in Chatham-Kent, the project proceeded even while under appeal, and by the time the decision was handed down in July 2011, was completed. (That project is now the subject of a $1.5 million lawsuit by a family who rapidly became ill after the project started.)

So the process is this:

-the companies do their own environmental screening according to the list of topics required in the regulations. They use private consultants (many of whom are members of the Canadian Wind Energy Association, a lobby group for the corporate wind industry) and do not seem to be required to provide information on those consultants’ credentials.

-the public has a limited time and frankly, limited ability to review and assess the assessments

-the environmental screening reports done by the corporate developers go to the Ministry of the Environment for review and approval. We have no idea the depth of the review process.

-There is no third-party, independent, professional review. Requests for “elevation” i.e., for a formal, full environmental assessment to be done by the Ministry of the Environment have been refused: not ONE has been granted since this began in 2006.

In short, the Ontario government believes so strongly that wind power is “good” and “green” it doesn’t really require a proper environmental assessment.

Worse: if environmental effects are experienced such as the bird kills at Wolfe Island (the developer TransAlta forecast 2 per year per turbine and has been surprised to find the rate exceeds 13 per turbine), the Ministry of the Environment simply RAISED the acceptable number of birds that could be killed.

Worse still: there is NO accepted methodology to measure environmental noise from industrial wind turbines—the MoE staff admit this! (See http://www.windyleaks.com )

That’s not acceptable to us.

Doesn’t sound very “environmental” either.

Wind power: it’s not what you think.

Want to live here?

Click to view full size image

Read Full Post »

Cards on the table, results of the editorial board meeting with the candidates from Nepean-Carleton, in today’s Ottawa Citizen.

Here is the link: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/Nepean+Carleton+Tory+candidate+opposes+North+Gower+wind+farm+project/5372716/story.html

Here is the story:

OTTAWA — The Tory candidate in Nepean-Carleton wants a controversial wind farm project slated to be placed in North Gower killed.

Lisa MacLeod, who was until the election was formally the MPP for the riding, told the Citizen editorial board that her stand is not only because of her constituents’ adamant opposition to the project, but stems also from a fundamental objection to the Liberal clean energy plan, which she claims is contributing to high hydro rates in the province.

“The community doesn’t want it and as their representative, I am not comfortable with it. I opposed it in the legislature and I continue to oppose it,” MacLeod said.

Provincial Liberals have made clean energy a key part of their platform, saying renewables like and solar and wind power are key to Ontario’s future. They’ve made significant investments in the area, and one of the projects the McGuinty government has thrown its weight behind is a proposal by a company called Prowind Canada for an eight-to-10 turbine project near North Gower.

Many people in the community bitterly oppose the project. And MacLeod, the senior provincial Tory in Ottawa, says the lack of local control over the project is unacceptable, and it will be stopped if the party wins on Oct. 6.

MacLeod and three challengers for her seat — Liberal Don Dransfield, New Democrat Ric Dagenais and Green party candidate Gordon Kubanek, were befoire the editorial board to answer questions and articulate their visions.

In particular, they clashed over the future of clean energy.

MacLeod said her opposition to the North Gower project is not an indictment of clean energy but of the cost of the Liberal plan.

“What’s happening is that hydro bills are going up as a result of these massive subsidies,” she claimed.

“By no means do we not support renewable energy. That’s not what this is about. This is about putting it at an affordable rate.”

Dransfield said the reality is that MacLeod and her party oppose clean energy, and said the hydro debt charges the Tories are now complaining about were incurred by them years ago when they bungled the issue as part of their effort to privatize delivery of power. He acknowledged that the Liberal green energy plan is costing money, but said that’s what happens whenever a new business is being established. Front-end costs are often high but in the end, things even out. “We have to embrace new technology and to do that we have to build new infrastructure. New infrastructure costs money,” he said.

Kubanek said the Greens also oppose the North Gower project only because they don’t believe in corporate involvement in clean energy production. They believe that wind farm and other renewable energy projects should be undertaken by community groups, not corporations. Kubanek dismissed MacLeod’s claim that the green plan is contributing to high hydro rates, saying the impact is negligible. He said Ontario’s future lies with green energy but wants the government strategy changed to put community groups at its heart. He said costs that are being incurred today are necessary for the future.

“We are convinced that for the next 20, 30, 40 years, we are going to need to have wind and solar energy. The Liberal plan is a great idea, totally flawed execution,” he said.

Dagenais said the NDP is also concerned that enough hasn’t been done to understand the full implications of windmills, but overall prefers them to nuclear energy.

“I would rather have a windmill than a nuclear plant,” he said.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/Nepean+Carleton+Tory+candidate+opposes+North+Gower+wind+farm+project/5372716/story.html#ixzz1XTjcAjur

 

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

 

Read Full Post »

Last year, West Grey mayor Kevin Eccles stood up for the people in his community and called for a moratorium on industrial wind power projects because of the damage they were causing to health and property values.

And now, Mr Eccles is running in the upcoming provincial election. For the Liberals. Which has meant a certain change of heart.

Here is Mr. Eccles’ letter from 2010

 

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR

 

                    Mr. Kevin Eccles                                                                                                                Telephone:   519- 369-2200

                   402813 Grey Road 4, RR 2                                                                                             Facsimile:  519-369-5962

                  Durham, ON N0G 1R0                                                                                                                    Email:  keccles@greycounty.ca

 

        January 13, 2010

 

 

       TO:                           All Provincial Ministers

                                            All Members of Provincial Parliament

                                            Local Members of Parliament

                                            Area (Grey andBruceCounties) Member of Parliament

 

                                             All Municipalities within Grey andBruceCounties

                                            GreyCountyandBruceCounty

 

                                             All Ontario Municipalities

 

         As Mayor of theMunicipalityofWest Grey, on behalf of the Council and citizens of West Grey, I

         am calling upon the Province of Ontario to place an indefinite moratorium on industrial wind

         turbines in the Municipality of West Greyand other Ontario municipalities.

 

         The Council of the Municipality of West Grey, as its meeting held on January 11, 2010 passed the

         attached resolution regarding industrial wind turbines and is seeking all Provincial Ministers, MPP’s,

         local and area MP’s and all Ontario municipalities, including Grey and Bruce Countiesto support

         this resolution.

           Yours truly

                ORIGINAL SIGNED BY MAYOR KEVIN ECCLES

           Kevin Eccles

           Mayor

          MunicipalityofWestGrey

 

 

DISCLAIMER

This material is provided under contract as a paid service by the originating organization and does not necessarily reflect the view or positions of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), its subsidiary companies, officers, directors or agents.

 

Now, the “new” Mr. Eccles, the Liberal candidate, says he can’t support a moratorium, that he believes in the Green Energy Act, and that he trusts the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and the Energy Minister. The story is here: http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3289062

…………………………………

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

For more news daily go to http://www.windconcernsontario.org  and “like” the Facebook page Wind Concerns Ontario.

Read Full Post »

News today from Vermont, where the impact of industrial wind turbine projects has been felt, and people are changing their minds about wind power generation, based on their experience to date. It isn’t good. This is from an op-ed piece written by Annette Smith, who is Executive Director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment. The full post is at

http://vtdigger.org/2011/08/22/smith-whoa-to-wind-energy-development-in-vermont/

Vermonters who live near mountains where wind turbines have been proposed have learned about all the issues associated with the technology. Call them NIMBYs or wackos, yell at them if they use the word “industrial” instead of “utility scale,” call them a vocal minority or a fringe group, they now number in the thousands and have had to become educated by reason of location.

If you live in the “sacrifice zone” of wind energy development (draw a circle with a radius of two miles from the ridgeline — you get the impacts but no compensation), you learn that wind turbines:

a) collapse, catch fire, throw ice, throw blades,
b) kill birds like raptors, and endangered bats
c) require cutting bear-scarred beech trees and fragmenting wildlife habitat
d) destroy songbird habitat
e) require hundreds of thousands of pounds of explosives to blast miles of new roads
f) require impervious road construction on highly erodible soils
g) require filling headwater streams and degrading water quality, resulting in fewer fish
h) make noise extending over a mile that can interrupt sleep and make people sick
i) are being permitted less than 200 feet from property lines
j) have blinking lights and industrialize the landscape
k) divide communities; turn neighbors, family members and towns against each other and more, with issues unique to ridgeline development in Vermont.

With so much at stake for Vermont, the prudent thing to do is stop, look and listen. Wind developers and our political leaders owe it to all Vermonters and our wild creatures to make sure we get this right.

On Friday, former Gov. Jim Douglas was on Vermont Public Radio and was asked about big wind turbines. He said, “…the natural beauty of Vermont is our strong suit, and to put these big machines on our precious ridgelines is not something that’s in the state’s interest…. I think it’s the wrong choice for Vermont.”

We have a lot to lose. Getting it wrong will be a very expensive mistake. For those people living near Vermont’s big wind energy proposals, it already has been.

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Please donate to the Wind Concerns Ontario “Winds of Change” tour, leading up to the election by going to http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com

And, to donate to local efforts (we are in the “hole” after the postal strike which affected our much-anticipated Windfall event) use the button below. Thank you.

Read Full Post »

Rick Conroy, editor of the Wellington Times—one of Canada’s last independently operated newspapers—has been outspoken on the “green” energy move by the Ontario government. In one of his earlier columns he famously wrote that no industrial wind turbine in the world can “power a toaster on its own”—they all need back-up from a tarditional power source. In the case of Ontario, that’s natural gas.

But we digress. Here is Rick’s most recent column, from last Friday.

Unravelling

It was another tough week for Dalton McGuinty on the energy file. First the European Union jumped on board the effort to force the Ontario government to open its renewable energy market to international suppliers.

McGuinty understood all along that if his dream of wind turbines on every horizon and solar panels on every pasture was to take root, he needed to promise jobs. Lots of jobs. He would call them green jobs.

He understood as well that these jobs had to be more than just a few weeks of bolting together components manufactured somewhere else. So he tried to kickstart a provincial wind and solar component sector. He did this by restricting the amount of foreign content (both goods and services) that could go into projects under his government’s FIT (feed-in tariff) program. Under his decree 60 per cent of the content of a solar project must be made up of domestic products and services by next year—50 per cent for wind projects.

These restrictions were in direct violation of world trade organization (WTO) rules, and McGuinty knew it. But he gambled that by the time the court heard any appeal a homegrown industry would have developed— ready to compete toe to toe with the world.

It didn’t happen. Nervous about shifting ground rules and manic management of the energy file in general, investment capital largely stayed away. Frustrated by the lack of action McGuinty jumped into bed with Korean industrial giant Samsung—promising billions of taxpayer dollars if they would please, please build windmills and solar panels in Ontario.

Desperate people make bad deals. It will take hundreds of millions of dollars for the next government to unwind the province from this arrangement.

In the meantime, first Japan and now the EU have launched appeals to overturn McGuinty’s indefensible protectionist tactics. Appeals they will win. McGuinty is running out of time. This folly too, and the cost of defending it, will end up on your electricity bill.

But matters got worse last week in an Ontario Energy Board hearing when Hydro One asked the regulator for a six-month exemption from meeting deadlines for assessing and connecting small renewable-energy projects. Nearly all of these are small solar home and farm-based projects.

Currently the province has received nearly 35,000 applications for small renewable projects (10 kilowatts or less)—22,821 have received conditional offers. But only 6,780, or less than a third, have executed contracts—meaning they are generating electricity into the grid and earning revenue. Tens of thousands of folks have been left hanging. Many have spent $100,000 or more on solar panel installations believing they had a deal. But with each delay their prospects of ever getting connected to the grid grow dimmer.

They should not have been surprised.

The fundamental hurdle with solar and wind energy is that it is intermittent and cannot be harnessed. It is a supply source that cannot be turned up or down to match demand. Electricity cannot be stored in grid scale amounts—so it must be produced when it is needed.

Nothing in our 60-year-old electricity grid is designed or equipped to manage generating sources that are pumping out electricity at 100 per cent one moment, zero another and 33 per cent the next. It is a physical and technical hurdle that had to be addressed first—before we squandered families” nest eggs and added billions of wasted dollars onto our electricity bills.

Then this week we learned that McGuinty knew all along that the noise from industrial wind turbines would have adverse effects on residents nearby— even those 550 metres away as prescribed by the Green Energy Act. This fact was revealed in a memo between Ministry of Environment officials last spring (See page 14). The document only came to light as a result of a freedom of information request.

Bit by bit the blind ambition McGuinty brought to the energy file is unravelling at his feet. The bureaucrats who once acquiesced to the premier’s wishes despite their better judgment—are now sitting on their hands. They are waiting for the self-destruction to be complete—waiting for the electorate to deal with the McGuinty government in October.

The wacky decision-making may end in October but the bills for nearly a decade of mismanagement of Ontario’s electricity grid will pile up for years to come. McGuinty’s enduring legacy.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca and catch the latest Windyleak at http://windyleaks.com

 

Read Full Post »

Environmentalist organizations like the Climate Action Network Canada seem to feel that any side effects from the industrial wind power generation industry are acceptable because of the need to halt the use of coal for power generation in Ontario (despite the fact that the province invested hundreds of millions on clean coal technology, which the current government halted). This story is interesting because an organization in the U.S. is now suing the State of Colorado over its renewable energy policy.  It has resonance here because, for some reason, although Quebec has a surplus of power from hydro generation, Ontario will not contract to buy more of it, preferring to install expensive wind power.

Here, the American Tradition Institute, whose goal is to “return science and accountability to environmental policy, says “it’s time to put wind on trial.” (See video link)

Read on.

ATI Environmental Law Center Sues State of Colorado Over Constitutionality of RES Mandate

By Elmer on April 5, 2011 10:08 AM | No Comments | No TrackBacks

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Monday, April 4, 2011
Contact: Paul Chesser, Executive Director, paul.chesser@atinstitute.org
(202)670-2680

If you cannot read this press release, please click here: http://www.atinstitute.org/blog_post/show/104

Today American Tradition Institute’s Environmental Law Center filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the constitutionality of Colorado’s Renewable Energy Standard, based upon evidence that the state’s law violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Commerce Clause reserves the regulation of interstate commerce to the federal government.

Specifically ATI’s complaint argues that because the state mandate provides economic benefits to Colorado’s renewable electricity generators that are not available to out-of-state power generators, and because the state imposes burdens on interstate electricity generators that are not balanced by the benefits to Colorado and its citizens, that the RES violates the Commerce Clause. The complaint also states that the law promotes renewable sources and discriminates against lower cost, more reliable energy generation from out of state suppliers, which is unconstitutional.
“Colorado’s renewable energy standards impose a burden on the interstate market for wholesale electricity,” said Kent Holsinger of Holsinger Law, LLC, ATI’s Denver-based counsel for the case. “Among other things, these state mandates discriminate against out-of-state electrical generation–no matter the source. This runs counter to the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.”

The heart of the lawsuit addresses both the uneconomical and environmentally harmful nature of wind-generated energy. In addition to higher costs than traditional generating sources, wind energy creates more pollution because it requires coal or natural gas as backup generation when the wind either does not blow, or when it blows too hard and causes systems to shut off.

“Research shows that when wind energy is on the electrical grid, operators must use more coal and gas generation to keep the electrical power in balance,” said David Schnare, Esq. Ph.D., director of ATI’s Environmental Law Center. “This forces coal and gas plants to ‘cycle’ up and down to keep pace with when wind varies, which is extremely inefficient and dirty. Hard observations show that this cycling of coal and gas plants causes more air pollution and greenhouse gases than if wind was not connected to the grid.”

Also, Colorado residents do not realize how badly the RES statute affects their pocketbooks. William Yeatman, an energy policy analyst for the Competitiveness Enterprise Institute and ATI’s electricity rate expert, explained, “Unfortunately for Coloradans, their ratepayer protections are illusionary. The true RES costs are obfuscated with accounting gimmicks.”

The RES case is the ATI Environmental Law Center’s first lawsuit. ATI and the ELC were established for true environmental protection, while also guarding the rights of humankind to access and utilize natural resources responsibly, and recognizing the need to weigh costs and benefits.

“This case against Colorado’s RES is part of our effort to restore sanity to environmental policy in the states,” said Paul Chesser, ATI’s executive director. “Combined with our economic analysis, this lawsuit will highlight one example where we expect to make the appearance of environmental responsibility match reality.”

See ATI’s Complaint Asking a Federal Court to Declare Colorado’s Renewable Energy Standard Unconstitutional. ( http://www.atinstitute.org/uploads/File/ATI-RPS-Complaint-ATI-v-Colorado.pdf )

Visit the American Tradition Institute Web site ( http://www.atinstitute.org/blog_post/show/103) to view all declarations and documents associated with the Environmental Law Center RES case.

See ATI’s economic analysis of Colorado’s Renewable Energy Standard ( http://www.atinstitute.org/blog_post/show/76 ).

 …………..

See a 3-minute video at http://www.atinstitute.org/ati-environmental-law-center-v-state-of-colorado-renewables-mandate-pt-1-pollution/#comment-461

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »