Last week at the candidate forum organised by the Pugwash Chamber of Commerce, Warden Keith Hunter stated that because of local opposition to a proposed wind "farm" on the Gulf Shore, it did not go ahead. He said he helped intervene on our behalf in a conversation with (then) Minister of Environment, Mark Parent.
This is in line with what representatives from Atlantic Wind Power Corp and Cobequid Area Wind Farms have stated publicly several times: that if this project was not welcome by the community, it would not go ahead.
All four candidates agreed that turbines should not intrude on the neighbouring property owners. People should be able to enjoy their properties.
They all agreed that wind energy, along with other forms of renewable energy, is part of what we should be doing as a Province to reduce greenhouse gases but, for a variety of reasons, they should not be placed too close to homes.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Candidates agree on wind turbine setbacks and public consultation
Candidates stage second debate
DARRELL COLE
The Amherst Daily News
PUGWASH – Residents should be consulted and their concerns answered when it comes to placing large wind farms near homes and cottages.
That was the consensus among four of the candidates seeking to be the next Cumberland North MLA during the second of two forums at St. Thomas Moore Roman Catholic Church Hall last night.
“I like windmills and we need to use more alternative energy, but we need to look at the placing of these things close to homes so they don’t interfere with people’s lives, property values and scenery,” Liberal candidate Brent Noiles said when asked his stance on promoting renewable energy and the impact of such projects on the community.
Pugwash and the Gulf Shore area were at the centre of a public controversy involving the plan by Atlantic Wind Farms to erect wind turbines near the Gulf Shore Road.
Progressive Conservative Keith Hunter, the warden of the county when it passed bylaws that would’ve allowed the turbines, said the residents of the area had a lot to do with the wind farm not going forward.
“The people fought against it and there are no windmills on the Gulf Shore,” Hunter said.
Brian Skabar, representing the NDP, said people have a right to be heard when it comes to the placement of wind turbines and said such projects must require close public consultation.
“People have a right to enjoy their property without the intrusion or the noise,” said Skabar, adding that renewable energy should play an important role in the province’s future.
Independent Ernest Fage said government regulation and public consultation will be key to preventing what residents went through in Gulf Shore.
“We need to have government regulation just like we do for other resources like the fishery and forestry,” he said.
Skabar said he’s not prepared to promise regulation until more is learned about the industry.
Responding to a question from Northport resident Joe O’Byrne on the Northport Bridge, Fage said he has been in touch with officials from the Department of Transportation and the bridge will be replaced in 2010, with design work this construction season.
“That’s the best I can tell you,” Fage said. “I have been ensured it is safe with the jersey barriers.”
Hunter said he wishes it could be replaced quicker and worries about its structural integrity, while Skabar wants the government process to be more transparent.
“If the rating goes from zero to nine and this one’s a four, I’d like to know what’s a one. What criteria is used and how is the decision made?” Skabar said.
The candidates were questioned about the beef industry and what they’d do for farmers.
Fage said red meat producers need support with a cash infusion and marketing support.
“We have to do it and it’s right to do it,” said Fage.
Hunter said he tried to support local producers when he ran his store, but found interprovincial barriers and a lack of inspectors difficult.
“You can say buy locally, but you can’t force people to do it. You need to educate people,” Hunter said, adding he’d like to see local inspection stations so small business owners can purchase and sell local products.
Skabar agreed that telling stores what they can sell goes against the spirit of free enterprise, but suggested real consultation with all stakeholders and the development of a long-term plan.
Hunter said that while large stores will be hard to convince, there are plenty of smaller stores that do purchase local.
Noiles said it’s important to keep talking on this issue.
“We have to keep talking about these things and as citizens we have a responsibility to talk about it and ask questions,” Noiles said.
Linden farmer Frank Foster said farmers are tired of having the symptoms talked about without anyone talking about a cure.
Noiles said the solution is a new government, pointing out the Conservatives have fumbled the ball while Hunter said he’s not sure if anyone knows how to save the industry.
“The best way to save it is to do what you’re doing and that’s promoting by local. You’re selling the product out there instead of going through the major chains who can’t handle it,” Hunter said.
Fage said the toughest thing with posing solutions is getting everyone pulling in the same direction including the farmers, government and retailers.
On the subject of tourism, all four candidates suggested talking full advantage of what the community has, pointing out the Pugwash Peace Exchange appears to be better known outside Nova Scotia than inside.
Green Party candidate Aviva Silburt did not attend last night’s debate.
http://www.amherstdaily.com/index.cfm?sid=257438&sc=58
DARRELL COLE
The Amherst Daily News
PUGWASH – Residents should be consulted and their concerns answered when it comes to placing large wind farms near homes and cottages.
That was the consensus among four of the candidates seeking to be the next Cumberland North MLA during the second of two forums at St. Thomas Moore Roman Catholic Church Hall last night.
“I like windmills and we need to use more alternative energy, but we need to look at the placing of these things close to homes so they don’t interfere with people’s lives, property values and scenery,” Liberal candidate Brent Noiles said when asked his stance on promoting renewable energy and the impact of such projects on the community.
Pugwash and the Gulf Shore area were at the centre of a public controversy involving the plan by Atlantic Wind Farms to erect wind turbines near the Gulf Shore Road.
Progressive Conservative Keith Hunter, the warden of the county when it passed bylaws that would’ve allowed the turbines, said the residents of the area had a lot to do with the wind farm not going forward.
“The people fought against it and there are no windmills on the Gulf Shore,” Hunter said.
Brian Skabar, representing the NDP, said people have a right to be heard when it comes to the placement of wind turbines and said such projects must require close public consultation.
“People have a right to enjoy their property without the intrusion or the noise,” said Skabar, adding that renewable energy should play an important role in the province’s future.
Independent Ernest Fage said government regulation and public consultation will be key to preventing what residents went through in Gulf Shore.
“We need to have government regulation just like we do for other resources like the fishery and forestry,” he said.
Skabar said he’s not prepared to promise regulation until more is learned about the industry.
Responding to a question from Northport resident Joe O’Byrne on the Northport Bridge, Fage said he has been in touch with officials from the Department of Transportation and the bridge will be replaced in 2010, with design work this construction season.
“That’s the best I can tell you,” Fage said. “I have been ensured it is safe with the jersey barriers.”
Hunter said he wishes it could be replaced quicker and worries about its structural integrity, while Skabar wants the government process to be more transparent.
“If the rating goes from zero to nine and this one’s a four, I’d like to know what’s a one. What criteria is used and how is the decision made?” Skabar said.
The candidates were questioned about the beef industry and what they’d do for farmers.
Fage said red meat producers need support with a cash infusion and marketing support.
“We have to do it and it’s right to do it,” said Fage.
Hunter said he tried to support local producers when he ran his store, but found interprovincial barriers and a lack of inspectors difficult.
“You can say buy locally, but you can’t force people to do it. You need to educate people,” Hunter said, adding he’d like to see local inspection stations so small business owners can purchase and sell local products.
Skabar agreed that telling stores what they can sell goes against the spirit of free enterprise, but suggested real consultation with all stakeholders and the development of a long-term plan.
Hunter said that while large stores will be hard to convince, there are plenty of smaller stores that do purchase local.
Noiles said it’s important to keep talking on this issue.
“We have to keep talking about these things and as citizens we have a responsibility to talk about it and ask questions,” Noiles said.
Linden farmer Frank Foster said farmers are tired of having the symptoms talked about without anyone talking about a cure.
Noiles said the solution is a new government, pointing out the Conservatives have fumbled the ball while Hunter said he’s not sure if anyone knows how to save the industry.
“The best way to save it is to do what you’re doing and that’s promoting by local. You’re selling the product out there instead of going through the major chains who can’t handle it,” Hunter said.
Fage said the toughest thing with posing solutions is getting everyone pulling in the same direction including the farmers, government and retailers.
On the subject of tourism, all four candidates suggested talking full advantage of what the community has, pointing out the Pugwash Peace Exchange appears to be better known outside Nova Scotia than inside.
Green Party candidate Aviva Silburt did not attend last night’s debate.
http://www.amherstdaily.com/index.cfm?sid=257438&sc=58
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Wind farm 'kills Taiwanese goats'
A large number of goats in Taiwan may have died of exhaustion because of noise from a wind farm.
A farmer on an outlying island told the BBC he had lost more than 400 animals after eight giant wind turbines were installed close to his grazing land.
The Council of Agriculture says it suspects that noise may have caused the goats' demise through lack of sleep.
The power company, Taipower, has offered to pay for part of the costs of building a new farmhouse elsewhere.
A spokesman for the company said the cause of the goats' deaths still needed to be investigated, but that it doubted the goats died from the noise.
“ One night I went out to the farmhouse and the goats were all standing up; they weren't sleeping ”
Farmer Kuo Jing-shan
Farmer Kuo Jing-shan
Before the wind farm was built about four years ago, farmer Kuo Jing-shan had about 700 goats.
Shortly after the electricity-generating turbines were installed, the 57-year-old says his animals started to die. He now has just 250 goats left.
Penghu is notorious for its strong howling winds. Mr Kuo said the stronger the wind, the louder the machines became.
"The goats looked skinny and they weren't eating. One night I went out to the farmhouse and the goats were all standing up; they weren't sleeping.
"I didn't know why. If I had known, I would've done something to stop the dying," he told the BBC's Cindy Sui in Taiwan.
Plausible
A local livestock inspector from the agriculture council said that Mr Kuo was the only farmer to have reported such large-scale deaths.
He said his claim was plausible because of all the farmers in the Penghu archipelago, his farm was closest to the wind turbines - only 40m away.
"Abnormal noises could affect the normal growth and feeding intake of animals and cause them to suffer sleep deprivation," Lu Ming-tseng said.
Mr Kuo said the power company had offered to help him move but that there would be no compensation for the loss of his goats.
"It's a pain to relocate, but what can I do. I can't survive with the wind turbines," he said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/8060969.stm
Published: 2009/05/21 12:33:21 GMT
© BBC MMIX
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
NSP’s use less, pay more proposal draws heat
Nova Scotia Power’s plan to add a surcharge to power bills for electricity that customers don’t use is being panned.
An expert witness for the province’s two largest pulp and paper mills says the Utility and Review Board should turn down the power company’s request because there’s no incentive for consumers to use less electricity if they’re going to be charged for it anyway.
The proposed surcharge would offset Nova Scotia Power’s lost revenue from reduced consumption and "would blunt the motivation for the customers to participate for the simple reason that it would lower the benefit," U.S. energy expert Alan Rosenberg testified in evidence pre-filed with the board.
The board will begin hearings into Nova Scotia Power’s proposed energy conservation programs on June 3 in Halifax.
The power company wants the regulator to approve the surcharge to residential power bills to cover $7.7 million of a $23-million program to cut electricity consumption next year. Retailers such as Wal-Mart are being asked to pay $7.2 million. The amount of the proposed surcharge hasn’t been determined.
Mr. Rosenberg supports the energy-conservation program but called the proposal for a surcharge "far from ideal regulation" and said the regulator should be playing the role of competition for Nova Scotia Power, which is a regulated monopoly.
"In the competitive arena, companies do not get to recover ‘lost’ revenue from their customers when their sales decrease," said Mr. Rosenberg, hired by NewPage Port Hawkesbury and Bowater Mersey Paper Co. Ltd. to appear as a witness at next week’s hearing.
Mr. Rosenberg, a principal with Brubaker and Associates, Inc. of Chesterfield, Mo., said he is unaware of any other Canadian utility that uses such a surcharge.
A consultant hired by Halifax Regional Municipality has similar concerns. Robert Greneman of Shaw Consultants International Inc. of Cambridge, Mass., states in pre-filed evidence that the proposed surcharge acts to "thwart conservation incentives."
Nova Scotia Power argues that its 440,000 residential customers would benefit the most from the energy-efficiency programs.
The Ecology Action Centre in Halifax has argued that reducing energy use could mean Nova Scotia Power wouldn’t have to build a $1-billion coal-fired power plant.
The province has yet to name an independent administrator to oversee the power conservation initiative. One is expected to be appointed next month.
Nova Scotia Power’s proposal expands on programs offered last year and includes promoting energy-efficient appliances and lighting, electrical conservation retrofits for new and existing homes, energy audits and upgrades for low-income households, and customized projects for small business and industry.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Wind park starts storm
By BRIAN MEDEL Yarmouth Bureau
Published: 2009-05-23
DIGBY — With just one week remaining for people to comment on a proposed 30-megawatt wind turbine park at Digby Neck, some worried local residents have gotten together to scrutinize the proponent’s environmental assessment application.
Scotian Windfields Inc. has partnered with SkyPower Corp. of Ontario to create and operate Digby Wind Park.
A year ago the partnership revealed that it plans to erect 20 turbines in an area 40 kilometres by five kilometres in Digby Neck.
The partnership has been given a 20-year contract by Nova Scotia Power and plans to have turbines operating by the spring of 2010, according to updated schedules.
The company filed an environmental assessment registration document on April 30. The public has until May 30 to comment.
Judith Peach, one of about two dozen area residents who met Thursday night, said they’ve never been asked by the company what they think about the project.
That’s probably because they don’t have property leased to the wind park for turbine placement or access roads.
"They’ve consulted with our municipal government, assuming that they’re representing us," said Ms. Peach about the company.
"They’ve consulted with the people who’ve leased. They’ve consulted with Nova Scotia Power.
"They haven’t consulted with the people who aren’t leasing (but) who will have to live with the turbines."
The environmental assessment report refers to the region as being sparsely populated, said Ms. Peach. But she said 110 homes can be found within a couple of kilometres of the proposed wind turbine park. Many are within 600 metres, she said."If the company thinks it’s sparsely populated and therefore there’s no opposition, then that’s not really the case," said Ms. Peach about the region.
Scotian Windfields also launched its own Digby project website (digbywindproject.com) this month.
A link to Nova Scotia’s Environment Department provides the entire environmental assessment registration document for reading and printing and the opportunity for anyone to comment on the project.
According to the company website, a community information session is planned for this summer, although a time and place have not yet been chosen.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/1123474.html
Published: 2009-05-23
DIGBY — With just one week remaining for people to comment on a proposed 30-megawatt wind turbine park at Digby Neck, some worried local residents have gotten together to scrutinize the proponent’s environmental assessment application.
Scotian Windfields Inc. has partnered with SkyPower Corp. of Ontario to create and operate Digby Wind Park.
A year ago the partnership revealed that it plans to erect 20 turbines in an area 40 kilometres by five kilometres in Digby Neck.
The partnership has been given a 20-year contract by Nova Scotia Power and plans to have turbines operating by the spring of 2010, according to updated schedules.
The company filed an environmental assessment registration document on April 30. The public has until May 30 to comment.
Judith Peach, one of about two dozen area residents who met Thursday night, said they’ve never been asked by the company what they think about the project.
That’s probably because they don’t have property leased to the wind park for turbine placement or access roads.
"They’ve consulted with our municipal government, assuming that they’re representing us," said Ms. Peach about the company.
"They’ve consulted with the people who’ve leased. They’ve consulted with Nova Scotia Power.
"They haven’t consulted with the people who aren’t leasing (but) who will have to live with the turbines."
The environmental assessment report refers to the region as being sparsely populated, said Ms. Peach. But she said 110 homes can be found within a couple of kilometres of the proposed wind turbine park. Many are within 600 metres, she said."If the company thinks it’s sparsely populated and therefore there’s no opposition, then that’s not really the case," said Ms. Peach about the region.
Scotian Windfields also launched its own Digby project website (digbywindproject.com) this month.
A link to Nova Scotia’s Environment Department provides the entire environmental assessment registration document for reading and printing and the opportunity for anyone to comment on the project.
According to the company website, a community information session is planned for this summer, although a time and place have not yet been chosen.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/1123474.html
Monday, May 11, 2009
Wind turbines still a health concern for group
Lucknow Sentinel, Ontario
6 May 2009
For Sandy MacLeod and a group of 11 neighbours living in the Ripley industrial wind turbine project, it’s been a very long 18 months. They just want the healthy home environment they had enjoyed for some three to 32 years returned.
“We just want it to be over,” said MacLeod.
The simple request goes out to the companies Acciona and Suncor that own the project and to the provincial Liberal government who approved the operating standards. The group also includes John and Erin MacLeod, Brenda and Glen Wylds, Helen and Ross Forster, Barbara Basser, Melissa Cammaert, Kent Wylds and their daughter Keiara plus David Colling who has been helping the group by testing electrical pollution at their properties.
In a recent interview, at the MacLeod residence, all made it clear that the familys’ environments had two changes occur simultaneously in November of 2007. First there was a change in the hydro configuration to their homes enabling electrical pollution to enter via a cross contamination from the wind turbine high voltage collection lines. The second change was the repetitive sound, both low frequency and audible from the blades of the industrial turbines that began rotating close to and above the height of their homes. Since these two changes, all began experiencing sleep deprivation, humming in the head and ears, stress, anxiety, heart palpitations, increased blood pressure, vibrations in the chest, earaches, headaches, an increased sensitivity to noise and sore eyes. It gets worse when the winds increase.
Before the development was up and running they had questions. “In May 2007 we had set up regular monthly meetings with representatives from both companies to answers our concerns about health, property values, construction problems, and the bird population,” said Helen Forster.
At each meeting they asked the wind developers to produce the protocol they used if a “stakeholder” had health problems in one of their other wind projects. No protocol was ever produced. They were assured over and over that the E-82 turbine was the 'Cadillac' of turbines and if there was a health problem that the companies would work forward to resolve the problem.
The problems got worse. Between May to July of 2008 the Forster, MacLeod and family members became so ill they were billeted in hotels, motels and boarding homes in Kincardine paid for by the wind company.
That’s when David Colling, an electrical pollution consultant and the wind representative found another group of victims in the Wyld’s family. “We too began to be billeted in Kincardine for the next six months,” said Glen Wylds. During time away from the harmful environment all stated that their symptoms began to decrease. This huge life upheaval continued until the companies had the homes disconnected from Hydro One and put on stand alone generators for months to determine if the electrical pollution could be a factor.
This action helped as did burying two sections of high voltage collector lines, but, it wasn’t back to 100 per cent. There were a lot of so-called delays and some people did not get back into their home until the Friday before Christmas. Nothing was done for others.
After an underground line failure and winter winds, severe health problems forced Glen and Brenda Wylds to purchase and move to another residence in Kincardine. Sandy MacLeod experienced heart attack like symptoms and was ordered to have an alternative place to live and a health leave from work. More recently, in April, Kent, Melissa and their daughter Keiara Wylds have been billeted in a Kincardine motel by the oil company/wind developer. Today, two families have, at their own expense, been forced to modify their residence. Those who continue to reside in their homes continue to experience symptoms on a regular basis.
After about an hour or two of being out of the area, Glen Wylds pretty much stops feeling the symptoms until he gets near fluorescent lighting. “I have documentation on electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) and what they are experiencing is like a peanut allergy,” said David Colling. “Every time they go back into a similar environment their symptoms will reappear and EHS will likely be with them for the rest of their life.”
Continued After Advertisement Below
Advertisement
In a recent response from Acciona, Eric Schneider, the director of communications for North America, said, “We can’t find any co-relation between their health concerns and the wind farm project. We have 208 wind farms in 14 countries and have never had these type of problems. I don’t want to dismiss their symptoms, but it’s not common to wind farms.”
However a supporter of the group and other victims in Ontario searching for a resolution to the health problems is Dr. Robert McMurtry M.D., F.R.C.S (C), F.A.C.S. who is former Dean of Medicine at the University of Western Ontario and an orthopedic consultant at St.Joseph’s Hospital in London. Also, in December 2003, he was appointed to the Health Council of Canada, a post he still holds today.
Dr. McMurtry gave a deputation on April 22 to the Standing Committee on General Government regarding Bill 150 (Ontario Green Energy Act). In the deputation he listed many of the health problems people living in wind projects in Ontario are experiencing and the lack of support being given by either government officials or wind turbine representatives.
This is an excerpt from the document:
“Let me be clear however as to my deepest concern: adverse health effects are occurring as we speak. Many victims have joined us today in the hope of being heard. There is no question that they are genuinely suffering and more people are at risk if the rules are not changed substantially.”
Dr. McMurtry also went on to refer to the problems the victims in Ontario are having in trying to get help for their health concerns.
“Most disturbing of all are the comments describing the sheer anguish and sense of betrayal that many feel. No one seems to care; no one appears to be listening to their plight. They feel they are losing their homes and their lives. The situation has been exacerbated for many who have experienced denial and abusive behaviour by wind turbine representatives and on occasion from Ministry of the Environment officials.”
Dr. McMurtry ended his presentation with a proposal to the government by stating, “There is a way out of this dilemma. Authoritative guidelines must be established based on sound science. A well designed epidemiological study conducted by arms-length investigators, mutually agreeable to all sides must be done. In addition and far more simply is to engage sound engineers to determine the presence or absence of low frequency noise near existing wind farms in Ontario. Anything less would be an abandonment of responsibility by the government.”
The Ministry of Environment’s (MOE) Owen Sound office received a directive from
Dr. Hazel Lynn, the medical health officer for Grey Bruce, to investigate the health problems the Ripley victims reported to her in early December of 2008. Shawn Kerry, an MOE spokesperson, said they only respond to noise complaints. He said the MOE is there to keep the noise level at the regulated MOE level, which is 40 dBA taking into consideration background noise. He went on to say they have to wait for the outside consulting company, Jacques Whitford paid for by wind developers Acciona and Suncor, to finish their second sound testing. Then the MOE would be there to regulate the findings.
“We all received the report on the first sound study done in May 2008 nine months later in February 2009, even though it was available months prior. In the first sound report four turbines within a one and a quarter mile of three homes did NOT meet the MOE poor standards of 40 dBA. That is 10.5 per cent of the whole field,” said Sandy MacLeod.
With health problems being the major concern for the group, many of them have consulted their family doctors over the past 18 months. As a group they have entered the OHIP system 61 times. One victim’s OHIP costs were tallied by a local hospital’s finance department at $5000. Some have been told to stay away from their homes and the area giving them the adverse health problems. “My doctor told me I may need to avoid the environment as much as possible,” said Helen Forster.
“We have taken three-year-old Keiara to the emergency room 10 times with problems and Dr. McMurtry said my daughter shouldn’t be there (at their home in the Ripley Wind Project). Melissa as well because she is pregnant,” said Kent Wylds. “My daughter has had earaches with screaming at night and not being active at all. Since we’ve been in Kincardine she’s been a totally different kid.”
Dr. Lynn sent a letter on March 27 to Prime Minister Stephen Harper indicating that local residents and municipalities have expressed health concerns related to the increased use of wind turbines in Grey and Bruce Counties.
The Health Board feels there is insufficient research and evidence. The communication however endorsed a resolution prepared by the Corporation of the County of Prince Edward regarding renewable energy, which urges all levels of the Canadian government to be responsible for public health, energy creation and energy management. At this time, no representatives from Grey Bruce Public Health Unit have been out to the Ripley Wind Project site, to interview the victims.
One of the biggest disappointments for the group has been dealings with the Ontario Liberal Government representatives.
“You might think that if a group of 11 victims reached out to the Premier of the province, the highest elected Liberal official, in a faxed letter, not once, but, four times that that would be enough to get intelligent, unbiased, scientists to investigate and help. But you would be disappointed. That is what I tried and my Premier or his Ministers didn’t and don’t care about rural Ontario taxpayers being harmed by wind projects,” said Sandy MacLeod.
It took from November 2008 to February 2009 with the help of Huron Kinloss clerk Mary Rose Walden to obtain a meeting with Huron-Bruce MPP Carol Mitchell.
“We had a 30 minute meeting with Mitchell on Feb. 13. She stated that she knew all about us and the project. When asked if she would like to live in Glen’s home to experience the harm, she fired back and asked if we would rather live near a pig barn or grain mill,” said John MacLeod.
Members of this group also addressed the Standing Committee on the General Government into Bill 150 the Green Energy Act. During that presentation they told Mitchell,
“Point 3: We formally request that our M.P.P., Carol Mitchell resign from the standing committee and devote 100% of her time to resolving the harm to health of families in Kingsbridge, Ripley and now Tiverton wind projects. Ms. Mitchell needs to spend her time focusing on her constituents who hired her to do a job for them, “resolve their health problems”. Some families have been suffering for more than three years.”
Statement from Victims of Wind – The Ripley Group:
“Return Our Health and Homes and Prevent harm to Ontario Citizens presentation. At the same meeting Glen Wylds inquired if two months was a reasonable length of time for a constituent to wait before a response from Mitchell.”
On April 30, at a Liberal function in Lucknow, Mitchell said she was aware of the group’s concerns and has had talks with Suncor about doing further testing to find a solution to the problem. Mitchell has not been out to the any of the victims’ homes.
When wind developers meet with the MOE, the Health unit or government officials there are no victim representatives at the table as part of the solution process. There are many other victims in Ontario. Recently a Victim of Wind support group has been created at vow2help@gmail.com. This was set up by Wind Concerns Ontario, a group of regular Ontario citizens concerned with protecting rural Ontario for future generations (www.windconcernsontario.org)
“Some of us have farms and livestock and that’s our living, some have made rural Ontario their home and some of us came here to retire. Basically we just want our way of life back.” said Wylds.
“Look at the quality of our lives. We have the right to have the safe and healthy home environment we had before November 2007,” said Sandy MacLeod.
http://www.lucknowsentinel.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1555728
6 May 2009
For Sandy MacLeod and a group of 11 neighbours living in the Ripley industrial wind turbine project, it’s been a very long 18 months. They just want the healthy home environment they had enjoyed for some three to 32 years returned.
“We just want it to be over,” said MacLeod.
The simple request goes out to the companies Acciona and Suncor that own the project and to the provincial Liberal government who approved the operating standards. The group also includes John and Erin MacLeod, Brenda and Glen Wylds, Helen and Ross Forster, Barbara Basser, Melissa Cammaert, Kent Wylds and their daughter Keiara plus David Colling who has been helping the group by testing electrical pollution at their properties.
In a recent interview, at the MacLeod residence, all made it clear that the familys’ environments had two changes occur simultaneously in November of 2007. First there was a change in the hydro configuration to their homes enabling electrical pollution to enter via a cross contamination from the wind turbine high voltage collection lines. The second change was the repetitive sound, both low frequency and audible from the blades of the industrial turbines that began rotating close to and above the height of their homes. Since these two changes, all began experiencing sleep deprivation, humming in the head and ears, stress, anxiety, heart palpitations, increased blood pressure, vibrations in the chest, earaches, headaches, an increased sensitivity to noise and sore eyes. It gets worse when the winds increase.
Before the development was up and running they had questions. “In May 2007 we had set up regular monthly meetings with representatives from both companies to answers our concerns about health, property values, construction problems, and the bird population,” said Helen Forster.
At each meeting they asked the wind developers to produce the protocol they used if a “stakeholder” had health problems in one of their other wind projects. No protocol was ever produced. They were assured over and over that the E-82 turbine was the 'Cadillac' of turbines and if there was a health problem that the companies would work forward to resolve the problem.
The problems got worse. Between May to July of 2008 the Forster, MacLeod and family members became so ill they were billeted in hotels, motels and boarding homes in Kincardine paid for by the wind company.
That’s when David Colling, an electrical pollution consultant and the wind representative found another group of victims in the Wyld’s family. “We too began to be billeted in Kincardine for the next six months,” said Glen Wylds. During time away from the harmful environment all stated that their symptoms began to decrease. This huge life upheaval continued until the companies had the homes disconnected from Hydro One and put on stand alone generators for months to determine if the electrical pollution could be a factor.
This action helped as did burying two sections of high voltage collector lines, but, it wasn’t back to 100 per cent. There were a lot of so-called delays and some people did not get back into their home until the Friday before Christmas. Nothing was done for others.
After an underground line failure and winter winds, severe health problems forced Glen and Brenda Wylds to purchase and move to another residence in Kincardine. Sandy MacLeod experienced heart attack like symptoms and was ordered to have an alternative place to live and a health leave from work. More recently, in April, Kent, Melissa and their daughter Keiara Wylds have been billeted in a Kincardine motel by the oil company/wind developer. Today, two families have, at their own expense, been forced to modify their residence. Those who continue to reside in their homes continue to experience symptoms on a regular basis.
After about an hour or two of being out of the area, Glen Wylds pretty much stops feeling the symptoms until he gets near fluorescent lighting. “I have documentation on electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) and what they are experiencing is like a peanut allergy,” said David Colling. “Every time they go back into a similar environment their symptoms will reappear and EHS will likely be with them for the rest of their life.”
Continued After Advertisement Below
Advertisement
In a recent response from Acciona, Eric Schneider, the director of communications for North America, said, “We can’t find any co-relation between their health concerns and the wind farm project. We have 208 wind farms in 14 countries and have never had these type of problems. I don’t want to dismiss their symptoms, but it’s not common to wind farms.”
However a supporter of the group and other victims in Ontario searching for a resolution to the health problems is Dr. Robert McMurtry M.D., F.R.C.S (C), F.A.C.S. who is former Dean of Medicine at the University of Western Ontario and an orthopedic consultant at St.Joseph’s Hospital in London. Also, in December 2003, he was appointed to the Health Council of Canada, a post he still holds today.
Dr. McMurtry gave a deputation on April 22 to the Standing Committee on General Government regarding Bill 150 (Ontario Green Energy Act). In the deputation he listed many of the health problems people living in wind projects in Ontario are experiencing and the lack of support being given by either government officials or wind turbine representatives.
This is an excerpt from the document:
“Let me be clear however as to my deepest concern: adverse health effects are occurring as we speak. Many victims have joined us today in the hope of being heard. There is no question that they are genuinely suffering and more people are at risk if the rules are not changed substantially.”
Dr. McMurtry also went on to refer to the problems the victims in Ontario are having in trying to get help for their health concerns.
“Most disturbing of all are the comments describing the sheer anguish and sense of betrayal that many feel. No one seems to care; no one appears to be listening to their plight. They feel they are losing their homes and their lives. The situation has been exacerbated for many who have experienced denial and abusive behaviour by wind turbine representatives and on occasion from Ministry of the Environment officials.”
Dr. McMurtry ended his presentation with a proposal to the government by stating, “There is a way out of this dilemma. Authoritative guidelines must be established based on sound science. A well designed epidemiological study conducted by arms-length investigators, mutually agreeable to all sides must be done. In addition and far more simply is to engage sound engineers to determine the presence or absence of low frequency noise near existing wind farms in Ontario. Anything less would be an abandonment of responsibility by the government.”
The Ministry of Environment’s (MOE) Owen Sound office received a directive from
Dr. Hazel Lynn, the medical health officer for Grey Bruce, to investigate the health problems the Ripley victims reported to her in early December of 2008. Shawn Kerry, an MOE spokesperson, said they only respond to noise complaints. He said the MOE is there to keep the noise level at the regulated MOE level, which is 40 dBA taking into consideration background noise. He went on to say they have to wait for the outside consulting company, Jacques Whitford paid for by wind developers Acciona and Suncor, to finish their second sound testing. Then the MOE would be there to regulate the findings.
“We all received the report on the first sound study done in May 2008 nine months later in February 2009, even though it was available months prior. In the first sound report four turbines within a one and a quarter mile of three homes did NOT meet the MOE poor standards of 40 dBA. That is 10.5 per cent of the whole field,” said Sandy MacLeod.
With health problems being the major concern for the group, many of them have consulted their family doctors over the past 18 months. As a group they have entered the OHIP system 61 times. One victim’s OHIP costs were tallied by a local hospital’s finance department at $5000. Some have been told to stay away from their homes and the area giving them the adverse health problems. “My doctor told me I may need to avoid the environment as much as possible,” said Helen Forster.
“We have taken three-year-old Keiara to the emergency room 10 times with problems and Dr. McMurtry said my daughter shouldn’t be there (at their home in the Ripley Wind Project). Melissa as well because she is pregnant,” said Kent Wylds. “My daughter has had earaches with screaming at night and not being active at all. Since we’ve been in Kincardine she’s been a totally different kid.”
Dr. Lynn sent a letter on March 27 to Prime Minister Stephen Harper indicating that local residents and municipalities have expressed health concerns related to the increased use of wind turbines in Grey and Bruce Counties.
The Health Board feels there is insufficient research and evidence. The communication however endorsed a resolution prepared by the Corporation of the County of Prince Edward regarding renewable energy, which urges all levels of the Canadian government to be responsible for public health, energy creation and energy management. At this time, no representatives from Grey Bruce Public Health Unit have been out to the Ripley Wind Project site, to interview the victims.
One of the biggest disappointments for the group has been dealings with the Ontario Liberal Government representatives.
“You might think that if a group of 11 victims reached out to the Premier of the province, the highest elected Liberal official, in a faxed letter, not once, but, four times that that would be enough to get intelligent, unbiased, scientists to investigate and help. But you would be disappointed. That is what I tried and my Premier or his Ministers didn’t and don’t care about rural Ontario taxpayers being harmed by wind projects,” said Sandy MacLeod.
It took from November 2008 to February 2009 with the help of Huron Kinloss clerk Mary Rose Walden to obtain a meeting with Huron-Bruce MPP Carol Mitchell.
“We had a 30 minute meeting with Mitchell on Feb. 13. She stated that she knew all about us and the project. When asked if she would like to live in Glen’s home to experience the harm, she fired back and asked if we would rather live near a pig barn or grain mill,” said John MacLeod.
Members of this group also addressed the Standing Committee on the General Government into Bill 150 the Green Energy Act. During that presentation they told Mitchell,
“Point 3: We formally request that our M.P.P., Carol Mitchell resign from the standing committee and devote 100% of her time to resolving the harm to health of families in Kingsbridge, Ripley and now Tiverton wind projects. Ms. Mitchell needs to spend her time focusing on her constituents who hired her to do a job for them, “resolve their health problems”. Some families have been suffering for more than three years.”
Statement from Victims of Wind – The Ripley Group:
“Return Our Health and Homes and Prevent harm to Ontario Citizens presentation. At the same meeting Glen Wylds inquired if two months was a reasonable length of time for a constituent to wait before a response from Mitchell.”
On April 30, at a Liberal function in Lucknow, Mitchell said she was aware of the group’s concerns and has had talks with Suncor about doing further testing to find a solution to the problem. Mitchell has not been out to the any of the victims’ homes.
When wind developers meet with the MOE, the Health unit or government officials there are no victim representatives at the table as part of the solution process. There are many other victims in Ontario. Recently a Victim of Wind support group has been created at vow2help@gmail.com. This was set up by Wind Concerns Ontario, a group of regular Ontario citizens concerned with protecting rural Ontario for future generations (www.windconcernsontario.org)
“Some of us have farms and livestock and that’s our living, some have made rural Ontario their home and some of us came here to retire. Basically we just want our way of life back.” said Wylds.
“Look at the quality of our lives. We have the right to have the safe and healthy home environment we had before November 2007,” said Sandy MacLeod.
http://www.lucknowsentinel.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1555728
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Wind: the next battlefront
Janice Harvey
Telegraph Journal (NB)
Published Wednesday May 6th, 2009
It’s as predictable as the wind. Now that big utilities and corporations have grabbed hold of wind energy, the controversies begin.
The first complaints were of the visual impact of wind farms on their landscapes and waterscapes. Now a new concern is emerging. People who live near wind turbines are complaining of health problems such as sleep disorders, migraines, tinnitus, equilibrium problems, depression and anxiety attacks, and in children, learning disabilities. A 2008 California study and a 2007 British study have dubbed the “wind turbine syndrome,” an effect on the inner ear by low energy noise from the turbines. There may also be an effect from air pressure changes from the turning turbines.
I first heard of this last year. A CBC radio documentary featured a family in southwestern Nova Scotia driven out of their home by the new wind installation nearby. Their story demonstrated, as do all the similar stories that are cropping up around the world, that we have learned nothing from the past century of hyper-industrialization. Regardless of technology or intention, scale and intensity matter. Indeed, it has been the vast scale and intensity of industrialization that has pushed the impact of economic development way beyond any reasonable thresholds of ecological and human tolerance. (For an eye-opening read on this topic, check out J. N. McNeill’s Something New under the Sun: An Environmental History of the 20th Century).
In the wind farm case, scale and intensity imply squeezing as much energy as possible out of each unit, and locating as many units on as large a portion of the landscape as possible. This results in mind-boggling dimensions for both individual turbines and wind farms.
The third leg of this stool is the pervasive pro-development bias within regulatory agencies, which ultimately expresses itself as a dismissive attitude towards public concerns. I’ve heard the story of the Nova Scotia family a thousand times. They are suffering real health problems as recounted above. The company’s response? They followed all the rules; no studies have proven a direct link between wind turbines and health effects; their own noise monitoring revealed levels below probable health effects. The bureaucrats echo the company line: the environmental impact assessment was done, no effects predicted. Therefore, there must be no effects. The family must be imagining their symptoms or, if they had them, they couldn’t possibly be connected to the new kid on the block — the wind turbine.
This contemptuous attitude is being repeated all over the world where these mega-wind farms are being built. The technology may have changed, but the business of doing business is the same. The companies circle the wagons and the government rides shotgun.
It doesn’t have to be that way. All governments, including Canada’s, present at the 1992 Earth Summit in Brazil endorsed the precautionary principle as an alternative to the conventional risk-based approach to environmental management. The precautionary approach states that the lack of scientific proof is not a justification for inaction in protecting against potential harm. Using this approach, the government simply needs to establish siting requirements for wind farms that assume there is a potential for health effects associated with the large-scale interference with air currents. These requirements would establish a mandatory setback from any dwelling based on the growing body of evidence of health impacts and incorporating a good margin of error. Such setback would be adjusted as more research is done.
There should also be a limit on the number of hectares that can be covered in any one location. If humans are being affected by changes in air pressure and noise, so are animals. The larger the wind farm footprint, the more habitat is being removed for some species.
In this current economic system, being precautionary would make wind farms “uneconomic.” We need a new business model in which people and the ecosystems on which all life depend come first. No more cost-benefit analyses in which economic benefits to some come at the expense of others. No more pollution- and illness-based profits. If governments need to offset the extra cost of truly green power while the economy is transformed from an exploitative to a protective model, so be it.
Wind developers and regulatory agencies have a choice. Either take these emerging issues seriously now and change the way the industry develops, or face inevitable and justified hostility at every turn. Wind developments need to be appropriately scaled and located well away from human habitation.
Everything has limits, even renewable energy developments. Until we learn that lesson, we will continue to make big mistakes.
Janice Harvey is a freelance columnist and president of the New Brunswick Green Party.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)