Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Prowind’

For those who think Europe is the haven for wind power generation done well, and where citizens are happy with the beautiful turbines spinning happily in the breeze, this will be a shock: people are sick, the landscape is ruined, and property values (and lives) devastated.

This short video comes from Russia Today via Facebook; thanks to Esther Wrightman and the Middlesex-Lambton group for calling attention to it.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=703983162949836

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Ottawa Wind Concerns

Back in May, after the decision by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in the case of Wiggins et al vs wpd, we wrote to the Mayor of the City of Ottawa to inform him of the importance of the Court’s decision: that it was acceptable for property owners who live as neighbours to property being leased for industrial-scale wind turbines to sue for property value loss and nuisance at the time of approval of a wind power project (i.e., they do not have to wait until the power project is built), and that the Court accepted that property value loss had already occurred simply with the announcement of the power project near Clearview Ontario, on the order of 22-50 percent.

The effect of the proposed wind power project in North Gower-Richmond will be significant, we wrote , in terms of the potential danger to health (also acknowledged by…

View original post 431 more words

Read Full Post »

We just visited Prowind’s website for an update—there is none, there never is–and were delighted to see the little sidebar of facts about wind power is still there. Cute little factoids pop up like, Wind power development  increases by 30% every two years.

Here are some facts of our own.

Wind power generation efficiency declines by 2 percent a year; by the end of the 20-year contract, the turbines are producing next to nothing, unless they have undergone expensive replacement of the nacelle and the blades.

Wind power efficiency is about 24 percent; solar is about 13, and nuclear is about 80 percent for 40 years. However, wind power developers typically peg the efficiency rate much higher. Algonquin Power, for example, claims an efficiency rate of 37 percent for some of its projects, and depicts a straight line rate of efficiency throughout the 20-years of its contract for government/taxpayer subsidies. This is not illegal; it’s up to investors to do their own research and discover the pie-in-the-sky claims.

Each large-scale wind turbine contains over a ton of “rare earth,” a material that is being mined in China with disastrous environmental consequences, and which is causing people to be made ill. At the end of the life of a large-scale wind turbine, the rare earth and all the toxic hydraulic fluids in the nacelle must be disposed of as toxic waste. With Ontario heading for more than 6,000 of these machines, where are we going to put all that stuff.

Wind turbines leak oil: just Google that and see the photos of the brown-streaked turbine towers.

Wind power developers claim that farm owners can farm right up to the turbines and can treat it just like a “very big tree,” said one company. The most of Ontario’s valuable farmland that is being used is 2 acres, they say. Not so: farm owners are finding out that despite the contract terms, as many as 12 acres of land are being used up, for access roads and equipment.

North American insurance companies are starting to have to explain to people who have leased land for large-scale turbines that they are no longer insured for property insurance or third-party liability. The risk is too great and, the insurance companies say, the property owners have no control over who’s coming on their land and when, so–no insurance! Specialty insurers will probably take over, at much greater premium costs.

The taxpayer-paid subsidy for the average large-scale wind turbine in Ontario si about $500,000 per turbine, per year. In return, the people of Ontario are getting: higher electricity bills, the bill for the transmission lines being built to service the wind power, the bill for power not to be produced when we don’t need it, lowered property values, dead birds and bats, and reduced attractiveness of some of Ontario’s most beautiful landscapes.

Email us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

Excellent article by Justin Sadler in yesterday’s Ottawa Sun. Mr Sadler quite rightly reviews comments by the Auditor General on the issue of Ontario’s renewable energy policy–there was never a business case made for the policy, no estimates of whether wind power would ever accomplish what was promised for it, and that claims of job creation are just not true.

Read the article here, and then vote in the poll if it remains open.

http://www.ottawasun.com/2012/05/26/turbine-tussle-whips-up

Email us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Donations toward our work and information packages for government at all levels, gratefully accepted

PO Box 3, North Gower ON   K0A 2T0

Read Full Post »

We’re hearing that the wind power generation project for the North Gower-Richmond area of the City of Ottawa is “on hold.”

This is not quite true: at the moment, as the Ontario government’s Feed In Tariff or FIT program has been revised, all projects without a FIT contract and that are proposed for more that 500 kW, must reapply for a contract. That said, the date of their original proposal stands.

So, as we understand it, Prowind has to reapply for a FIT contract.

That’s not really “on hold,” they’re just waiting for the next step in the process.

What would be wonderful, of course, is that the company would see that the community does not want this project, that there are all kinds of liability from locating giant, noise-producing wind power generators so near to hundreds of homes, and abandon the idea.

But when there are millions and millions of dollars in taxpayer subsidy to be had, as is the case with the Ontario government’s FIT program ($500,000 per turbine, per year) the only word in Prowind’s mind is: profit.

Email us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

Please check the maps in our documents and links page to see what the Marlborough wind project in North Gower-Richmond looks like, in terms of impact on the community.

One map shows the 2-km impact; this is based on the recent announcement by the Society for Wind Vigilance–a group of international scientists and health care professionals–that a 2-km setback is the MINIMUM for health and safety.

The other map shows the impact out to 3.2 km on property values.  This is based on the 40% AVERAGE property value loss determined by U.S. real estate appraiser Michael McCann.

If you live in North Gower-Richmond, be sure to be sitting down before you look at the maps.

And then remember that then-president of Prowind Cathy Weston wrote to a news paper last year that “wind farms” have the effect of protecting agricultural land from further housing development. No kidding.

Email us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

Ontario municipalities might be forgiven for overlooking one teensy negative aspect of industrial wind power generation facilities. It’s difficult to think 20 years down the road when the wind power developers and the Ontario government are putting photos of bucolic agricultural landscapes where dairy cattle graze right up to the base of a turbine (no houses in sight). There is no suggestion whatsoever of what the colossal structures might look like in a decade or so, when they are past their life span and nobody wants them any more.

All around the world, most notably in California and Hawaii, wind turbines stand rusting and rotorless, hideous scarred icons of greed.

It’s expensive to take them down. In South Branch, 30 minutes down the road from Ottawa/North Gower/Richmond, the wind power developer Prowind estimates that decommissioning costs for the 15 turbines will be in the region of $600,000. Or, said project manager Juan Anderson, perkily, “You can take them down yourself and get the value of the scrap!”

This is absurd for several reasons: first, the wind developers tend to be gone by the time the turbine structures are done with and second, there may be some value to the scrap, but not much, and any value there is could be offset by the horrendous costs of dealing with all the toxic elements such as the gallons and gallons of hydraulic fluids in the nacelle.

Wellington Times editor Rick Conroy relates the struggle in Prince Edward County to get Council to realize that decommissioning is a cost that could land on the municipality’s doorstep–and have to be paid for by the taxpayers. His column from the April 4th issue is valuable information on this and several other aspects of wind power generation.

The article is here: http://wellingtontimes.ca/takedown/

Email us at northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Photo: abandoned wind turbines in Hawaii. There are more than 14,000 abandoned and derelict turbines in the United States alone.

http://denglerimages.photoshelter.com/image/I0000eLa6MrmyQqY

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »