Skip to content

Archive for November 9th, 2012

What AWEA (and CANwea) Doesn’t Want You To Know About Wind Power

Institute for Energy Research — Canada Free Press — November 9, 2012

Renewable Electricity Standards and Other Pro-Wind Policies

In 2011, wind energy generated 2.9 percent of our electricity. And, yes, its level of generation has more than doubled since President Obama has taken office. While there is no doubt that his policies have benefited the wind industry, the major policy influencing wind power growth has been renewable electricity standards that 30 states and D.C. have requiring a specified amount of electricity be generated from qualifying renewable technologies by a certain future date. Both these mandates and subsidies have led to wind being used even when it is destructive to wildlife and detrimental to other technologies on the grid.

Wind, like all sources of energy, has both good and bad attributes. Some of the attributes people seldom consider when thinking about wind is, for example, its propensity to kill birds, bats, and other flying objects that come within its path, cause noise pollution which deprives people of sleep, require large land areas for its turbines, and provide only a fraction of the electricity that traditional technologies provide.

Renewable Electricity Standards and Other Pro-Wind Policies

Thirty states and the District of Columbia have renewable electricity standards that require increasing amounts of electricity generation from qualified renewable technologies. Since wind power is one of the least expensive qualified renewable technologies, its generation has increased by 116 percent and its capacity has increased by 83 percent since 2008. Of course, federal policies such as the production tax credit, the stimulus, and the 1603 Treasury program have helped encourage its development as well.

Further, taxpayers are paying huge sums to subsidize wind power.According to the Energy Information Administration, subsidies for wind power in fiscal year 2010 were almost $5 billion, 19 percent more than the subsidies that fossil fuels (oil, gas, and coal) received. And, 97 percent of the wind subsidies were due to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.[ia] Further, in 2010, wind power produced just 2.3 percent of our generation, making wind energy subsidies cost $56.29 per megawatt hour, while coal subsidies were just $0.64 per megawatt hour and natural gas and petroleum subsidies were the same as coal on a per megawatt hour basis. That is, wind subsidies were 88 times higher than those for coal or natural gas and petroleum on a unit of production basis.These policies have also changed who pays for the increased cost of electricity from just the users within the states that have the mandates to the U.S. taxpayer as well. That means that residents of the southeastern United States, for example, that do not have good wind resources help pay for wind energy consumed in states that want the increased wind power and have the wind resources.

(To continue reading, click here)

CTV reports on Kincardine residents wind turbine illnesses

Scottish Borders ‘on course for 1,000 wind turbines’

Simon Johnson, Political Editor — Telegraph — November 9, 2012

A thousand wind turbines are on course to be built in the Scottish Borders thanks to the SNP’s “backroom bullying” of the local council to ignore public opposition, it has been claimed.

Campaigners said official figures showed wind farm developers have already built or have planning permission for 403 turbines in the picturesque tourist area.

An additional 418 are in the planning system, either as live applications or appeals, while wind farm companies have started scoping and screening for around a further 200 turbines.

The figures emerged the day after the Daily Telegraph disclosed how SNP ministers are pressurising Scottish Borders Council to allow more wind farms even where they risk reaching “saturation point”.

Scottish Government planning officials have asked the local authority to change a new blueprint for the area’s future development after complaining of the “negative language” about wind farms.

The council also acceded to another SNP demand to drop proposals for turbine “buffer zones” around castles, abbeys, stately homes and gardens.

(To continue reading, click here)

Ratepayers ask residents to wake up — Wainfleet told to get active to fight turbines

Luke Edwards — Niagara This Week — November 8, 2012

While many relished the thought of an extra hour of sleep last weekend, the Wainfleet Ratepayers Association was asking Wainfleet residents to wake up.

“Unless you all go out and do something, it’ll never happen,” said Cam Pritchard, spokesperson for the West Lincoln Wind Action Group, which is fighting proposals from the Niagara Region Wind Corp. and IPC Energy to build more than 75 turbines in the municipality. Pritchard was one of three speakers at the Ratepayers Association’s Wake Up Wainfleet meeting on Saturday.

The association is fighting two proposals for turbines in Wainfleet. IPC Energy is proposing five turbines in the township, which is waiting final approval, and NRWC is also proposing a turbine project in the municipality. The NRWC project is still in its infancy.

Pritchard was the final of three speakers, and urged local residents to educated themselves and get involved.

He was joined by Joan Morris, an epidemiological clinical research manager, and Doug Pedlar, president of the London St. Thomas Realtors Association. Morris spoke about some of the health concerns regarding turbines, while Pedlar talked about worries over decreasing property values.

Morris accused the 2010 report on turbines from the Chief Medical Officer of Health of being incomplete.

“It failed to consider the indirect pathway of harm to health (caused by turbines),” she said.

(To contine reading, click here)

Six Nations / Samsung appeal wraps up

Jennifer Vo – PennEnergy — November 7, 2012

“No one on this tribunal will be living on this land. No one will know the effects until 40 years from now,” said Six Nations resident Lester Green in his closing statement at the Samsung Grand Renewable Energy Park hearing.

The daylong hearing heard the appellants including Six Nations residents Bill Monture and Lester Green and Haldimand Wind Concerns restate their case on the morning of November 2 while the afternoon heard the closing testimonies from Samsung and the Ministry of Environment.

“No one knows what this will bring until there’s a disaster,” said Monture who added that the land is still disputed and the next action natives will take is put up trespassing signs on the land against renewable energy projects.

“I have no respect for Samsung. They have no respect for the wildlife. All they care about is the money,” said Monture. “It’s pretty sad that we would give up our children’s rights for a dollar.”

The Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) requested both written and oral submissions from all parties with the purpose of giving everyone a final opportunity to be heard.

Monture and Green’s case revolved around the damage that the industrial wind turbines (IWT) could cause to the environment. They pled to the tribunal stating that Six Nations people live and rely heavily on that land.

Other arguments included the negative and irreversible effects the turbines could create to humans and animals; participants demanded more studies to be done including consideration of shadow flicker, which can create distractions for farmers operating farm equipment as well as reconsideration of the power line route.

One participant said if ERT approves this project then they want to see changes including moving the power line away from Haldimand Road 20 and making the volt route shorter and at a distance from other lines and homes. Those suggestions would essentially force Samsung to draw up new site plans and go through the REA process again.

The closing hearing at times became emotional, as participants showed concern about what the proposed project would mean for them.

(To continue reading, click here)