Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Parker Gallant’

For those of us who know the truth about industrial wind power generation–it is not “green”, it’s not “free”, and it can’t live up to any of the promises made about it–the sight of the industrial wind turbine in Toronto at Exhibition Place is a cruel joke. Thousands of people in Toronto pass by it every day and see it as innocuous, pretty even.

The truth about that one structure is a different story.

Here from Parker Gallant and the Financial Post, the true story of the Exhibition Place wind “mill.”

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/11/08/ontarios-power-trip-the-globe-has-gone-with-the-wind/

Ontario’s Power Trip: The Globe has gone with the wind

  Nov 8, 2011 – 9:35 AM ET | Last Updated: Nov 8, 2011 9:38 AM ET

The Globe and Mail declined to run the following letter to the editor from Parker Gallant:

Marcus Gee’s Nov. 2 article on the wind power in Toronto included the following statement: “A single wind turbine, championed by Jack Layton, the late NDP leader, has been operating for years at Exhibition Place in Toronto. Toronto Hydro says the impact on birds has been minimal and there is no evidence anyone’s health has been affected.”

Whether that single turbine has been beneficial to the Toronto Hydro customers is a question that was conveniently omitted. The facts speak for themselves. It has cost the taxpayers a lot of money! The following reference can be found in Toronto Hydro’s 2007 Annual Report, the last reference to be found in any subsequent Annual Reports.

“Renewables/Clean and Green Generation
TH Energy/WindShare wind turbine at Exhibition Place has produced approximately 4 million kWh of green energy since 2003”

So that single turbine that Toronto Hydro owns a big piece of has operated at 12.2 % of its rated capacity for the five years from 2003 to 2007 but questioning Toronto Hydro on the issue as to what has happened since 2007 gets no response. It hides behind the cloak of “confidentiality.”

The Exhibition Place turbine was championed by none other than Joyce McLean, current Director, Strategic Issues at Toronto Hydro, when she was engaged with TREC (Toronto Renewable Energy Association) pushing for the erection of the turbine. Ms McLean also sat as a Director and Chair of CanWEA (Canadian Wind Energy Association) and prior to that was active with Greenpeace. Jack Simpson, current VP, Generation on his posted Toronto Hydro bio, said he was an early advocate of green generation projects, responsible for the 750kW wind turbine at Exhibition Place and the 36kW photovoltaic system at 500 Commissioners St. in Toronto. So these two advocates of the turbine are in a position to deny their responsibility on the costs of their boondoogle by hiding behind the “confidentiality” issue burden the ratepayers with their misguided efforts to save the world!

If you vist the TREC website you will get an idea of how this entity would be unable to survive without handouts/grants from the Toronto taxpayer-owned Toronto Atmospheric Fund ($910,000), or the provincially owned Community Power Fund (amounts granted are undisclosed) and the provincially owned Trillium Foundation ($202,500). TREC also claim support from the Ontario Power Authority, City of Toronto, Toronto Hydro, CanWEA, CanSIA, the Ministry of Environment and the Toronto District School Board, of whom most are taxpayer funded institutions.

It should be pointed out that the anemometers in Lake Ontario were partially funded by TAF who granted funds to Toronto Hydro for their erection. This waste of taxpayer funds is a blatant affront, along with the necessity of Toronto Hydro paying the legal fees for their current lawsuit against OMERS. This lawsuit was instituted because Toronto Hydro isn’t satisfied that its executives will have sufficient monies in retirement benefits, because OMERS restricts the “bonus” payments when calculating retirement benefits. This CEO earned over $700,000 in 2010 including a bonus that exceeded $300,000.

Parker Gallant is a retired bank executive who looked at his electricity bill and didn’t like what he saw.

 E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca and follow us on Twitter at northgowerwind
 
Check out Dirty Business: the reality of Ontario’s rush to wind power, with contributions by Parker Gallant and three local authors, at http://dirtybusinessbook.wordpress.com

Read Full Post »

Much has been made in Ontario about the need for cleaner air and indeed many of the non-governmental organizations such as Environmental Defence, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, the Clean Air Alliance and the Registered Nurses Association, to name only a few, have gotten on the bandwagon with pleas ranging from  please stop pollution to the claim that “coal is killing people.”

Well.

The facts are (and by checking on writings by Ross McKitrick elsewhere on this site you can read those, as well as Ontario’s own clean air report) that Ontario has relatively good air quality and that what pollution does exist comes from south of the border and from automobiles. Dr. McKitrick and others have said that closing Ontario’s coal-fired power plants will not make a difference to Ontario’s air quality. Not that we’re defending coal but we need perspective.

Here, then, from Parker Gallant, a view on the recent rankings of countries according to air quality, Canada among them.

Going for First Place

 The September 27th edition of the National Post carried what an editor would refer to as filler pieces. The first on Page A7 was headed; “Canada ties for third among 90 countries ranked for air pollution” and the second filler was found on FP4 in a sidebar with the headline “WIND POWER DOUBLES IN CANADA”.

The first headline was from the first “Air Quality” database complied by the World Health Organization which gave Canada a tie with Australia following Estonia and Mauritius. The report purportedly covered 1,100 cities in 91 countries but we were beat by Estonia and Mauritius, incredible!

Looking at the production of electricity in Estonia the “Government policy and objectives toward its energy sector can be summarized in two ways: to provide a reliable source of energy for the country, and to provide such energy at the lowest possible cost.” Further “Estonia is unique among nations in its heavy use of oil shale.”

To be fair, Estonia does have 149 MW of wind generation which supplies less than 1/2 of 1% of their electricity consumption but one should also bear in mind that Estonia’s objective is to “provide energy at the lowest possible cost.”

Now lets take a look at Mauritius; # 2 in the WHO report. In the case of Mauritius this is the situation: “The generation of electrical energy is also dependent on diesel engines (61.7 percent), in three power stations, all situated around Port Louis. They have a total effective capacity of 176 megawatts. A seasonal contribution of 54.2 megawatts comes from hydro-plants and 90.5 megawatts from Independent Power Producers supplement capacity.”

The second filler was a press release by CanWEA [the Canadian Wind Energy Association] telling us that by the end of 2011 Canada’s installed wind capacity will be beyond 5,300 MW or reputedly enough to power 1.5 million Canadian homes. CanWEA goes on to say that another 6,000 MW has been contracted to come online across Canada. This press release also said “Ontario is expected to lead with 500 MW of wind power to be brought on line by the end of the year.”

So our drive from the Liberal government in Ontario has been to clean up the air by adding more and more controversial wind generation yet the two countries that beat us use principally “oil shale” and “diesel engines” to supply their households with electricity. That doesn’t sound clean or green!


Parker Gallant

Editor’s note: We’re not sure how Estonia and Mauritius would stack up against Ontario for air quality–they don’t have the 3MM people of Toronto chugging around in cars and buses, but Ontario’s air quality has continued to improve dramatically over the 1960s due to automobile-related initiatives like the Drive Clean program. What’s important to know is that industrial-scale wind power generation requires some form of back-up because it is unreliable and intermittent; Ontario’s choice is to build new natural gas plants to go along with wind power development. What effect will that have on air quality in future?

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 »

It’s been a breezy weekend in Ontario…which means, more money flying out of Ontario taxpayer and ratepayer pockets. According to energy analyst Scott Luft, record amounts of wind power were produced…but we didn’t need it. Parker Gallant estimates that Ontario sold off the excess power to other jursidictions at a huge cost: “So yesterday we paid the wind turbine operators $4,229,280 ($135 per MWh) to produce their record 31,328 MWh and exported it at an average price of $21 per MWh generating about $650,000 in revenue for a net cost of approximately $3.6 million. We also paid Bruce $931,000 ($65 per MWH) for steaming off (using your comparative drop from same day last year) the 14,325 MWh of nuclear so the net cost to produce the 31,328 MWh from wind fully costed was $4.5 million or $143 per MWh for power we didn’t even use! That $4.5 million will be added to the Global Adjustment and will push up the TOU & RPP rates.”

Wind is first to the grid so even if we don’t need it, the producers get paid the exorbitant FIT rates.

Seen on a sign held by demonstrators in Devon, England in the film “Wind Wars” (Part 2 airs tonight on TVOntario at 8 p.m. in the program “Blown Apart”):
WE PAY
THEY PROFIT

The North Gower Wind Action Group is a group of concerned citizens who believe that a proposed industrial wind power generation project with 10, 190-meter wind turbines right beside hundreds of homes in the North Gower and south Richmond areas of the City of Ottawa is NOT  an appropriate development. Evidence is showing that setbacks of less than 1.5 km are not safe for human health due to exposure to the environmental noise and vibration produced by these huge structures.

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

There were many people cringing at the various TV and radio campaigns mounted by so-called environmental groups and citizens’ groups prior to the election on October 6th. Perhaps most egregious was Environmental Defence’s “Penelope” campaign in which an eight-year-old was trotted through the province, asking people to vote “for” the environment, when what was really meant was people should vote for the Liberals.

To engage in political activity is to go against federal regulations for organizations claiming charitable status. Here is an open letter on the subject from retired investment banker and Energy Probe board member Parker Gallant, who is a frequent contributor to The Financial Post. He is asking for a full investigation of these organizations’ pre-election activities.

October 11, 2011

Open Letter to:

Mr. Jonathan Batty, Director of Election Finances and General Counsel,

Elections Ontario,

51 Rolark Drive, Toronto, ON., M1R 3B1

Dear Mr. Batty:

The recent Ontario Provincial Election saw a record low number of voters exercising their rights to vote. In my personal opinion it is because many voters feel that the system has been compromised and the outcome is not within their ability to influence through their vote. One of the principal reasons why, is that many large organizations with biased and prejudicied views used their might to support or denigrate certain parties and do so using all of the media available to them. When the weight of these organizations either favour a party or denigrate another it overwhelmingly influences the outcome.

In the election just over, approximately 8.8 million Ontarians were eligible to vote yet only 4.3 million (49.2%) of them exercised their rights. This resulted in a party winning the election with only 18% (1.6 million) of the eligible votes. There is something wrong with this and perhaps Elections Ontario should examine itself and its mandate in a serious effort to engage the voting public. Should the public service sector union(s) of 1 million voters (who represent as much as 62 % of the votes cast for the Liberal Party) be allowed to interfere with the election process to the extent they did in this and prior elections? Should vested interest groups such as the environmental Non Government Organizations (ENGOs) or registered charities be allowed to do the same by utilizing the media (both direct and social)? As the below notes both of these groups were allowed to do so by Elections Ontario; and in my opinion to the detriment of the democratic process!

As evidence of the above it has come to my attention that the under-noted organizations appear to have engaged in third party election advertising via a variety of media activities and it is my personal opinion that they should be investigated for their activities under the Election Finances Act, which applies to third party election advertising. Several of them or their founding members have also lobbied the Ontario Legislature without the benefit of registration with the Lobbyist Registry and those are noted. In those cases I would kindly ask that Elections Ontario simply advise the Integrity Commissioner of those infractions.

1. ComeClean.ca : This website appears to have been created by Environmental Defence Canada as noted from this quote taken from their website; “So far, Come Clean is a project of Environmental Defence Canada, Ontario Sustainable Energy Association, CPAWS Wildlands League, Pembina Institute, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, and Sierra Club Ontario” and as noted the contact point is the Director of Communications, Environmental Defence. This name is not registered in the Ontario Lobbyist Registry. This group posted a letter that encouraged people to send to all parties but the message is clear in that it states; “I’m concerned that our new clean energy jobs, our greenspace, and our clean air and water could be taken away from us. Ontario’s elected officials are all over the place in talking about these things, leaving us confused about the direction we are heading in. Please let me know where you stand on these issues. Please come clean!” The only party that stated they would kill the FIT program are the PC Party so the message is obviously directed at them and the clear intent of the letter is for the reader to favour one of the other parties that would retain it.  

2. Working Families according to their website is a coalition of 13 Unions of whom at least 4 are from the public sector. They have run a series of TV ads also posted on their website that were blatant in telling the audience to NOT vote for the PC party and have also posted numerous “articles” on their website from union leaders reputedly highlighting the dangers of the PC Platform. Working Families is not registered on the Ontario Lobbyist Registry.

3. Environmental Defence according to their website (and posted on other websites) enlisted an 8-year old as “the youngest candidate to not run in a provincial election” as soon as the writ was dropped. ED’s push with Penelope was clearly to retain the current Green Energy Act that they were partially responsible for creating in the first place. Penelope’s “campaign manager”, Adam Scott, is an employee of Environmental Defence and the “project coordinator for green energy”. The founder of ED was Mr. Bruce Lourie who sits on the Board of the Ontario Power Authority and the Board of the Trillium Foundation (provincially owned). The latter have granted ED $943K since 2007. Rick Smith of ED sent the attached letter out in an attempt to convince people to vote for “unsustainable growth and global warming” as well as “supporting policies that limit pollution and invest in clean energy”. That he uses his “doctorate” degree as if to imply a medical degree is an obvious attempt to make the reader believe he is a medical doctor. The Penelope “report card” discloses what ED want from the parties. Did this 8-year-old come up with the questions posed on that report card? ED also joined up with the United Steelworkers (unable to find them or bluegreencanada.ca on the Ontario Lobbyists Registry) to launch a website that promotes a CanWEA report favourable to retaining the Green Energy Act and the Long Term Energy Plan, both products of the previous government.

4. Ontario Sustainable Energy Association (OSEA) is another ENGO that has received almost $900K from the Trillium Foundation. OSEA has received considerable publicity for running biased TV ads recently pushing renewable energy and the Green Energy Act they claim they helped create. OSEA also launched biased websites and held a video contest that coincidentally awarded prizes as voting day neared. The list of sponsors and partners of this “contest” includes many ENGOs and Charitable Foundations as well as Associations as you will note when you visit their site. OSEA claims that the money to pay for the TV ads came from their “members” but never disclosed the source. Their financial position as at March 31,  2010 indicated they had only enough money to pay their staff for a month yet they were able to pay for these TV ads! How? Their members includes many publicly owned institutions from both the provincial & municipal sector so did those members contribute?. You can also reference my article for further information.

5. Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) are yet another biased institution that launched an election bus to tour Ontario to tell people that they should vote for the NDP.

6. Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation has told it’s members to vote as this excerpt points out: “This means again concentrating on priority campaigns that offer the best chance to:• Prevent a Conservative candidate from winning a seat away from an incumbent Liberal or NDP MPP

• Stop a sitting Conservative MPP from being re-elected

• Help more pro-education and progressive Liberal and NDP voices get elected”

This is blatant partisan instructions to the Federation members and denigrates the democratic process in our Province. Even their video “Get out the vote” shows windmills and full day kindergarten which is obviously sending a clear message to teachers and students that you should support both and vote for the party that has them on their platform.

7. Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association’s (OECTA) “Who Speaks for Childrencampaign was launched on YouTube in March. It highlights the successes of Ontario students since 2003, when the Liberal government came to power. It lauds Ontario’s recent education successes and refers to the tumultuous period of the Mike Harris years when unions clashed constantly and bitterly with Harris’ Conservative government. This is an obvious bias against the Ontario PC Party. OECTA had this to say in their press release of September 6, 2011; “Of the various political party platforms that have been released to date, only the Liberal platform addresses these goals.” Talk about a partisan position!

8.Citizens Climate Lobby is another organization that is not on the Ontario Lobbyist Registry despite calling itself a “Lobby” group. It has connections to OSEA (see above) and York University, Faculty of Environmental Studies (home of one of the founders of the Green Energy Act-Professor Jose Etcheverry), MaRS Discovery District (see below), Citizens Climate Lobby (USA) and Climate Action Network (see below). It has no visible means of support yet it has issued a letter that clearly favours the Liberals platform and states it is “in support of the Green Energy Act and the FIT program”, products of the Liberal Government.

9.Sierra Club is another charity that is and continues to lobby extensively in favour of the Green Energy Act and has received about $500K from the Trillium Foundation. The Executive Director, John Bennett has taken lobbying to the people in rural Ontario by showing up at local council meetings asking them to rescind their requests to the Provincial Government to declare a moratorium on future industrial wind turbine installations until a health study on their effects has been completed. Sierra Club also supported green prosperity “a joint effort by 21 of Ontario’s leading environmental organizations including Environmental Defence, the David Suzuki Foundation, Sierra Club Ontario, Greenpeace, Ontario Clear Air Alliance and others”. Interestingly enough the “green prosperity” website has a similar report card to the Environmental Defence’s Penelope report card (see above)!

10.Pembina Institute’s Cherise Burda was upfront in her analysis of the Ontario party platforms of the four parties vying for election in Pembina’s analysis by stating; “Each party has plans in its platform to keep our lights on and build transportation infrastructure,” says Cherise Burda, director of Ontario policy for the Pembina Institute. “But when it comes to building a clean energy future for Ontario, the Liberals and NDP are far ahead of the Progressive Conservatives.” Pembina claims to be non-partisan however this obvious recommendation clearly favours the Liberals and the NDP while tossing the PC and Green parties under the bus. The CRA rules indicate charities are not allowed to display partisan politics during an election regardless of Elections Ontario.

11. MaRS Discovery District , a charity created with Federal, Provincial and Municipal taxpayer money is another of those that feigns non-partisan policies but where a senior member of their staff, T. Rand a blatant supporter of the Liberals Green Energy Act recently guest blogged on Tyler Hamilton’s blog (affiliated with the green living website) had this to say:“Results matter. Support the party that built the GEA, as they’re the only ones in a position to protect it.” MaRS Discovery District cannot be found on the Ontario Lobbyist Registry.

 12. David Suzuki Foundation was co-founded by David Suzuki and until recently he was listed on their Board of Directors and endorsed the Ontario Liberal Party. That he claims he has severed his relationship with the Foundation is of no material value to the general population as his name is synonymous with the Foundation and he still is focused on, in the Foundation’s website. The Liberals were using his endorsement on their website, in TV ads and presumably in printed material thereby allowing his bias to their policies on energy generation to benefit their campaign.

13. Climate Action Network is another ENGO whose members are dozens of similar NGOs and charities and focused on the Ontario Provincial Election by offering visitors to its website to utilize a “grassroots toolkit” which were directly aimed at influencing the provincial voters. Headquartered in Ottawa in the same building as the Sierra Club it is obvious that there is collusion among the ENGOs that interferes in elections and evidence that they were very involved in pushing their agenda and supported the Liberal Party.

As a director on a non-partisan, energy-related NGO I find the foregoing activities not in keeping with the process that Elections Ontario is charged with keeping. I would assume that all of the above have spent more then the allowable $500.00 and are in breach of the Ontario Elections Act. In view of the foregoing I would appreciate your investigating the above institutions to ensure their compliance with the laws and rules governing the election process in this province.

Yours truly,

Parker Gallant,

a concerned citizen

Parker Gallant is also Contributing Editor to Dirty Business, the reality of Ontario’s rush to wind power. Details at http://dirtybusinessbook.wordpress.com

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

Today from Parker Gallant, an explanation of where the money from industrial wind power generation goes. It’s worse than you thought.

Here is the link http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2011/09/22/a-win-win-for-samsung-a-lose-lose-for-ratepayers/#more-31821

and here is the post.

A Win-Win for Samsung. A Lose-Lose for Ratepayers!

Posted on 09/22/2011 by MA

by Parker Gallant
On January 21, 2010 with much fanfare Dalton McGuinty’s Liberal Party issued a press release titled; “Korean Companies Anchor Ontario’s Green Economy”.  The McGuinty press conference to announce this event; labelled as the biggest wind and solar deal in the world was held at the TSX and he stated;

“Thanks to today’s announcement, we will be delivering more green energy for Ontarians to use — and more green energy products for North America to buy. With this step, Ontario is becoming the place to be for green energy manufacturing in North America.” .

The promise was it would create 16,000 jobs and a $7 billion investment. The investment amount has never been questioned, however what the press failed to report was the cost to Ontario’s ratepayers over the 20 years the contract for the 2,000 MW of wind and 500 MW of solar generation would be. It is over $20 billion that Samsung will be paid!

The PC party recently said this deal would cost each family in Ontario $732. per year. They don’t disclose how they came up with that value however, my calculations say that it will cost every ratepayer $119. per annum or $2,380 over the 20 years of the contract. My calculations are based on the delivery of approximately 4.7 million MWh (27% of rated capacity) of wind per annum at $135. per MWh and approximately 650 thousand MWh of solar (15% of rated capacity) at $443. per MWh less the current average cost of electricity of 7.3 cents per kWh.

It is also based on 4.5 million ratepayers. The McGuinty press release said Samsung’s 2,500 MW of renewable generation would be enough to power 580,000 homes. Missing in the press release was any reference to needing 2200 MW of new gas generation to back up Samsung’s wind and solar generation and paying the gas generators whether the wind was blowing or the sun was shining. That would add another $220 million each year (gas generators are paid approximately $100,000 per MW to sit idle) to the costs, and burden the ratepayers with another $50 per annum or an additional $1,000 over the 20 years.

Not included was the massive costs paid to deliver this power to our neighbours in Michigan, Quebec, New York and elsewhere as most of it will be delivered in the middle of the night or in the Spring and Fall when demand is low. My estimate also doesn’t include additional transmission costs (estimated at 4/5 cents per kWh) which will appear on the delivery lines of our hydro bills.

Now if the 16,000 jobs actually happened each of those jobs would be subsidized by the ratepayers at approximately $48,000 each. The math is simple; 4.5 million ratepayers pay $169 each to create those jobs and that amount is divided by the 16,000 jobs. But is that really going to happen?

Fast forward to August 30, 2011 and Samsung issued a press release on a website they called; www.cleanjobstoday.ca. Cute, eh-if its clean it must be good! Samsung’s press release was issued only days before the election writ was dropped and carried this message; “The company remains committed to fulfilling the terms of its Agreement and as a global, neutral company, has no interest in entering into a political debate.” It seems to me that they have in fact entered into a political debate, simply by issuing the press release knowing full well the election writ would be issued a week later. It is a fact that Samsung didn’t bother to register with the Ontario Lobbyist Registry until June 13, 2011 but perhaps they felt it wasn’t necessary as, from all outward appearances, it was our former Minister of Energy, George Smitherman that approached them.

Putting the foregoing aside however, it is interesting that the press release reports on the actual number of jobs that Samsung will create. The following “FACT” is taken directly from the foregoing press release;

“FACT: Samsung’s Agreement will see the creation of four new manufacturing facilities to produce state-of-the-art wind turbines and solar panels for its projects in Ontario, and for export around the world. Three of the facilities are now under construction and as a result, 600 people are at work today. 1,800 people will ultimately have jobs because of Samsung’s manufacturing commitment.”

So ultimately 1,800 people will have jobs, not the 16,000 promised by McGuinty back on that winter’s day in January 2010. This certainly ramps up the subsidy per job by a considerable margin and according to my calculation is an annual subsidy per job of $297,000.

The average cost of power delivered to the grid by Samsung will be 17.25 cents per kWh versus our current average TOU price of 7.3 cents per kWh. This is 135% more then we pay today. Samsung will generate a minimum of $927 million per annum meaning, on a cash flow basis, their $7 billion investment will be recouped in less then 7 1/2 years. The $927 million doesn’t include; cost of living increases in the contract (up to 20% to the cost of wind generated electricity), or the recently reduced “adder” of the (present valued) $110 million which will reduce that payback period.

Samsung’s press release also marginally overstates their anticipated production, forecasting they will provide power for 600,000 homes when all 2,500 MW are up and running. This is 20,000 more homes then the McGuinty press release stated but perhaps Samsung are confident that many Ontario families will be energy poor in the future thereby reducing our current annual average consumption to a lower level.
The final sentence in this press release will be sure to win the hearts and minds of all ratepayers and taxpayers in Ontario as it sums up by saying; “This is a win-win for Ontario’s taxpayers and hydro ratepayers alike. Samsung looks forward to continuing to partner with Ontario to create jobs in the production of clean energy for generations to come.”

In my opinion and from my humble perspective as a ratepayer and taxpayer I have some trouble in buying into this homily, however I’m sure there are plenty of McGuinty supporters like Dr. Suzuki, Rick Smith of Environmental Defence and John Bennett of the Sierra Club that see this as a happy event and are pleased with this wealth transfer to the Korean giant, Samsung.

Parker Gallant,
September 22, 2011

 

E-mail us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

For more information on Dirty Business: the reality of Ontario’s rush to wind power, for which Parker Gallant was Contributing Editor, go to http://dirtybusinessbook.wordpress.com

And, visit http://www.windconcernsontario.org for news through the day

 

SPECIAL EVENT SEPTEMBER 28 CLIENT SERVICES CENTRE NORTH GOWER 7 PM.

Read Full Post »

In today’s Financial Post, a letter responding to Parker Gallant’s excellent “Energy rules change in the wind” on August 4th (read the article at http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2011/08/04/energy-rules-change-in-the-wind/) that reveals some interesting linkages between the Ontario Liberal Party and the renewable energy industry. Elsewhere in the news today an announcement that China’s largest wind power developer is buying into a 100-MW wind project near Melancthon (poor Melancthon which already has hundreds of turbines) because of Ontario’s “supportive policies.” That means SUBSIDIES from taxpayers.

This letter pertains to a peak power hydro project but the environmental concerns and the political connections are worrying.

McGuinty’s peaking power fiasco

Re: “Energy rules change in the wind,” Parker Gallant, Aug. 4

Excellent article! I am wondering if more investigation and articles should be undertaken by the FP on the misguided Green Energy Act leading up to the election. This topic must the most underreported McGuinty fiasco yet.

Our group, the French River Delta Association, is fighting a peaking power hydro proposal known as the Allen & Struthers Project, undertaken by Xeneca Power. This company, which counts Arnold Chan, former executive assistant to McGuinty as a VP legal affairs, is about to destroy our nature preserve at the French River Provincial Park.

We have the science and the economics that say these peaking power plants are very wrong. Xeneca Power is totally funded by OP Trust, the pension fund of OPSU. Directors of OP Trust are appointed by McGuinty. OPSU members need to know where their pension investment is going.

The Green Energy Act allows proponents to provide their own environmental assessments, pay lip service to local stakeholders, and to if necessary “harass, harm or kill” any endangered/protected species in the way. The local MNR/MOE experts entrusted to protect our land and waters have been brutally silenced by Queen’s Park. The proponents of these projects are not being held to the same standard as you and I.

We are one of 38 proposed peaking power hydro dams that will hold back water from Georgian Bay, which is already suffering from record declining water levels. Our site is the spawning ground of many species of Georgian Bay fish. The water will only be released when the profit margin is right to generate power. These rivers will be all but dry the rest of the time. See Xeneca’s only completed power plant, at McGraw Falls near Earlton, Ont. The falls are bone dry most of the time.

Max Brugger, Stouffville, Ont.

Contact us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »