Environment and Labour Minister Mark Parent is rejecting the proposed Whites Point quarry in Digby County.
An independent panel report says the quarry project poses unacceptable risk to the environment and the community.
Mr. Parent says he agrees with the conclusion. Other recommendations will be reviewed and shared with appropriate departments.
The Environment Act allows the minister to reject such proposals.
~~~~~~~~~
The people spoke to the federal and provincial panel, who recommended the project be rejected, and it was.
Nice to see that common sense has prevailed. Let's hope that it is a growing trend.
http://www.gov.ns.ca/news/details.asp?id=20071120003
21 comments:
Oh Great, next thing Lisa is going to say that blasting from a quarry and the movement of large machinery is the equivalent of the sound from a wind farm. This quarry was a danger to the environment and was going to cause the destruction of a natural habitat. A wind farm is not the same thing and cannot be cast in the same light. If your retort is that the roads and foundations of a wind farm destroy the habitat than think again or go to a wind farm and actually measure how much land use is allocated per turbine. It is nowhere near as bad as a quarry.
No, Anonymous, that is not what I would be trying to say at all. If you understood our argument and that of the people of the Digby Neck area, you would understand that this is a very complicated matter that include jobs, lifestyle and aesthetics.
The potential for jobs lost in the White Point area from loss from tourism and fishing reflects quite closely ONE of our arguments - that this industrial installment is inappropriate for what is currently a residential, recreational, retirement and tourist destination area.
Indeed, the areas clear cut for this size of project would also closely resemble that for Whites Point. It is not just the area set aside for the turbines that is cut, but for the access roads that need to be kept open for the constant maintenance these machines require. The rest of the land between the turbines is rendered useless for any development other than for farming, because no one could possibly live there.
This discussion would be way more interesting if people would identify themselves. I don't agree with much of what John McManus says, but we would know who is making the comments and at least he has the guts to identify himself.
I have not posted a comment on here in a long while and I think that I may have been the one in the past that insisted that everyone who makes a comment should include their name. So I do agree with Lisa's comments in that regard. However I do not agree with the comparison that is being made with regards to the Whites Point quarry and I will only make these comments, because I have been some what familiar with this project since its origin.
First off it is well documented that by not opening this quarry that approximately 34 or so jobs will not be created in this area. An area that is already depressed for jobs. The jobs that would apparently be lost in tourism or fishing is no where near what is being lost by not having the project. I am however not in anyway shape or form supporting this project. I am actually quite happy that it is not going ahead, but that is because of the major environmental impact the project would pose. I cannot agree with your job comparison, because there are no resorts or large tourist attractions near the proposed site. Whale Watching tours could still go on and most of the fishermen have had to turn to tourism as a means to make money in the summer anyways and this is completely unrelated to the quarry. So the amount of jobs that could have been lost is negligible, because jobs are being lost by not having it.
With regards to the land use. This quarry would have involved the removal of around 150 Hectares of land that would never be able to be replaced ever, as in Forever. A wind farm during its lifetime could use perhaps 2 - 3 acres per machine for large devices and than another 10-20 km's of roadwork. These are high estimates. On a 50 Mw wind farm that would probably surmount to a 100-150 acres, not hectares, of land use for the machines and than another 10 km's of roadwork, which after 25-50 years could be reclaimed a lot earier than any quarry. The size of the wind farm would also be spread ovder several hundred hectares, so its overall impact on the environment would be quite small. Plus there would in all likelihood not be any contaminated soil to deal with. Now during the course of a wind farms use, you are probably right that there will be noone using the land for anything other than for agricultural purposes. But you have to ask yourself what are the intentions of this land anyways. To build rows and rows of cottages and develop the land even worse than what would happen with a wind farm? It seems a bit contradictory to me. I have stayed at the Scottish Pines, golfed at Northumberland and driven that route many times and if you think the people that actually own this land that is proposed for this wind farm want to develop it for other purposes than let them do that, but the truth is they elected differently and after all it is there choice, not yours.
So on that note Lisa I believe the comparison you have made is false. But most importantly I think that if you believe that the land proposed for this wind farm should be developed for residential/tourism purposes than you have contradicted this whole movement that you are making against wind farms. Because residential development or any buuilding development and expansion outwards from town and urban centers is far worse on the environment than any wind farm would ever be. So it all comes back to the original issue and that is money. If it is about money and people losing out on future opportunity than you should state that as opposed to saying that people will be getting sick and communities will be falling apart. I believe that you have mislead many people under the premise of health impacts from wind turbines when you know that the majority of people that have signed your petition will not be impacted at all from this wind farm. It is perhaps time for you to state your true intentions and provide your opposition with the proof that is needed to substantiate the many claims that you have made over the past several months!
Alex Dunlop
Tires aren't bad, incinerating them is. Gravel isn't bad, destroying a community to get gravel is. Green energy isn't bad, destroying a community's peace and quiet to produce it is. That is the point Lisa is trying to make.
"next thing Lisa is going to say that blasting from a quarry and the movement of large machinery is the equivalent of the sound from a wind farm."
Blasting generates inaudible infrasonic sound pulses which travels thru rock and seawater.
Large machinery from a quarry would create a large/loud accoustic noise spectrum in one of the quietest locations still left in nova scotia (all in the name of 34 slave type jobs which will be unhealthy mentally and physically for those who can put up with it)
Large collections of wind turbines
are an like a dissonant orchestra of inaudible infrasonic sound generators when rotated by the wind.
Nobody has taken the time to question how these will or can affect the natural habitat.
It's politically more important for the human species to have its electrical lifestyle than be concerned over the effects this unnatural sound/hummm/tone can have on the wildlife.
Its been demonstrated that infrasound is capable of serious disruption to natural biological and phsyiological functions.
These are an environmental hazard and have to be treated as such.
For those of you not having to live near a "windfarm" you don't have to be concerned .
Some of those who do will find out that their enjoyment of life is at risk!
The above comment from yet another anonymous are in line with many of the comments that I find on this blog that are so preposterous that they could only be accepted by a very small special group of people. They are also the reason why I try so hard to avoid this blog, but somehow I just keep coming back. I know someone will probably give some very well thought out answer like-"well don't visit the blog then". That would be a-typical, but in reality you are looking for support and you need people to visit this blog to provide open debate on the issues presented here, so that it is seen as an objective process. However when comments stating that wind turbines are an envioronmental hazard or that jobs that pay in excess of $50,000 per year for operating large machinery are for slaves it is no wonder that people seriously question the credibility of the NIMBY movement and this blog in general. Tell the thousands of Nova Scotians working in the tarsands or anywhere in the world that operate large machinery that what they are doing is for slaves. What is it exactly that they are a slave to? The Man? Some ubiquitous figurehead representing everything bad about capitalism and democracy? Once again I want to state that I am not supporting the Whites Point quarry whatsoever and I have even been to the houses of many of the residents that would have lived near the quarry. I am not in support of the quarry, but not because of its relation to your movement, which I believe there is none, but moreso, because of the environmental impact of removing 146,000,000,000 tonnes of aggregate to make more concrete.
Now with regards to the Environmental hazard that a wind turbine poses, I am still waiting for the hard eveidence that you keep pointing to. It is already accepted that wind farms will not be built in Aviary/migratory flight paths, so what other impact to wildlife are you talking about. Are deer, moose, frogs, toads and every little creature that roams the area going to drop dead? This won't happen and you know it, but if you are so concerned about wildlife, walk out into the woods today and stop the thousands of hunters that are shooting, Deer, Grouse, Pheasant, and Rabbits right as I am writing this. Better yet if this wind farm does not go ahead, stop the imports that will in all likelihood buy some of the land in the future to build, more golf courses, cottages or permanent homes. Yeah that is soooo much better for the habitat than any wind farm would ever be. I hope that anyone that views this posting will see the contradiction. With regards to the impacts on humans that you keep talking about I cannot and will not accept the current disorders which you keep on mentioning. I know too many people in the medical profession that are not accepting your views and as I trust there credentials moreso than the ones given here I don't see that changing until a national body accepts VAD or finally gives credence to the impacts from infrasonic sound. Now remember when I state that, I mean the sounds within 500 meters between house and turbine. In saying that I do know that smoking and the effects from aerial herbicide spraying were also seen in the same light and only a short while ago, however the physical nature of these toxins are more obvious than what is presented in the many infrasonic sound papers that you have provided. With that being said I will remain the skeptic until proven otherwise and I don't think that anyone here will be able to present this proof.
Also after seeing your comment on our dependance on electricty I could not help but be convinced that you must be the one that keeps on harping on this same issue. You are right our dependancy on energy could potentially be our own undoing, but at this moment in History that is not going to change and there are billions of people that require having their howmes heated by baseboards and furnaces. I can tell that there is noway that I could ever change your mind on this issue, but I can hope that people reading this realize that Nova Scotia imports 89% of its energy from abroad. When an energy crisis comes again, which it inevitably will, we will be on the bottom of the list for potential buyers of energy exports. On that note we need to improve our energy security immediately. This will involve the deployment of a whole array of conservation technologies and teachings, wind farms, tidal farms, solar farms, solar hot water heaters, biomass generators. As much as you want to knock the technology of today in wind farm development it is one of the best choices available for this region and you are sitting on a gold mine. With that said a wind farm will be in your region at some point, it may not be through this next round or even over the next decade or so, but it will happen. I can only hope that the federal and provincial governments of this great land at some point step up to the plate and deliver legislation that will put the issue of safe distances between wind farms to bed. I can't say how that will look or if it will even take on all or any of the issues that have been brought up here. It will come and there will be losers and winners!
Alex Dunlop
The report on the Wentworth meeting once again stated the prowind energy stance of the areas anti wind crusaders. Let's recap. Blog reports have been published about a number of wind developments: Higgins Mountain - bad. Marshville - bad. East Point - bad. Pubnico - bad. Brookville - bad.
There seems to be pattern here. No matter where a turbine is located, no matter how remote, regardless of the quiet operation, this blog condems them all. This is hardly a pro wind and pro green opinion. Even if the blanket condemnation is merely a ploy to kill the NIMBY project on the Irishtown Road by an otherwise environmental activist, the effect is a stance against any wind energy anywhere.
The only arguement mentioned at Wentworth is shadow flicker on the ski hill. The worriers can breath easy. The peak of the hill is a kilometer from Hwy 4. Any turbines will be across the road, on the far side of the railway and ,at minimum ,a further half a kilometer past teh Station Road. Turns out the hill and the towers will be around 2 1/4 km or 1 1/2 miles apart. The hills I have skied have always had shadows from clouds, trees, moguls, chairs etc.
The good news here is that all wind farm desigers, operators an regulators agree that any shadows diminsh to zero by 1000 meters. Most regulators specify a 10 rotor diameter ( 7-800 meter ) area for shadow flicker control. Any shadow flicker wihin this distance can be controlled easily; the turbines software can simply stop the rotor for the few minutes a day shadows may be present.
These shutdowns are rare. No shadows occur when the sky is cloudy, when the wind isn't blowing, at night, or when the wind turns the rotor away from potential receptors. Due to the motion of the earth around the sun, potential receptors ( windows, backyards, ski trails etc.) are only in any shadows path for a few minutes a day when all shadow causing circumstances are in place.
John McManus
Wind turbines generate low frequency infrasonic sound.
Large collections generate interferance type effects.
This is known to be capable of altering natural biological and physiological functions.
google "military infrasound" and read.
The line between what level will and what level won't is a guess at best -if there is line!
The longterm effects of this on the wildlife are unknown.
The longterm effects on humans living near these collections is unknown and extremely difficult to pinpoint accurately.
People whose health could be altered have reason to be concerned.
To the last anonymous:
I found a new ( to me ) reference today with a slightly altered Google search. Try " Vision Quest Infrasound".
One of the results from " Powernaturally.com" mentions a study by Hepburn Exploration Inc. at the Castle River Alberta wind farm.
The entry that struck me was a finding that infrasound readings were sometimes lower when the turbines were operating than when they were still.
If infrasound makes you sick, this proves that wind tubines make you better. Of course both these positions are silly. Environmental infrasound ( wind and wave action ) has been bombarding humans at levels around 85db for millenia with no ill affects. Any slight reductions by a wind farm will be just as irrelevent to health.
This exercise shows not just how useful and how much fun Google is but how important it is to use a number of search criteria to find out as much as possible.
John McManus
Mr.McManis
W ere you trying to decieve the people of Pugwash when you said the sound from the 27 turbines would be as loud as our fridge yet you knew they measured almost twice as loud infersound in Publico.
Someone said that this sound runs continuesly like a train runnin by an shakes you guts for hours.Now you sayin the win turbins will make the wind be quieter?
Dear anonymous number 5:
It may be a bit confusing to deal with the different acoustic measuring criteria for audible and infra sound but it is in no way deceiving.
The audible sound ( 20 - 20,000 hz ) measured at Pubnico is around 45 db. The manufacturers website for my fridge says the noise level is 42 db.
At the same time as audible sound measures 45 db at Pubnico, infrasound measures 85 decibles. This is not deceiving, infrasound must use a different scale because it can't be heard and at less than 100-110 db it can't be felt. Infrasound from wind and wave action at Pubnico measures 85 db. I have no information on infrasound from my fridge.
If you still find this concept deceiving or confusing, all the above information is easily accessable on the internet and there are sites with excellent primers on sound, it's components and it's measurement.
I didn't say that wind turbines can lower ambient infrasound; Hepburn Exploration Inc. did. They measured this phenomenon at the Castle River Wind Farm in Alberta. Try Googling " Vision Quest Infrasound " to read the information for youself. It is quite clear .
John McManus
Dork Dunlop keeps saying this proposed windfarm is not located in the direct path of migratory birds when we all know the Wallace Bay Wildlife park is 2 kms from the Gulf Shore as the rare red mallard flies.
I can't remember ever being called a dork before, but it is rather flattering. The above anonymous proves my point about the great people that are found anonymously on this blog posting such intelligent comments as Dork Dunlop. In terms of the rare red mallard that you are talking about I am assuming that you did say that the protected area is 2 km's away? So what does that mean now? That all wind farms will have to be in excess of 2 km's from any wild life area, even though one red mallard would probably never be seen over the propsed wind farm and plus another 2 km's from any dwelling or even property line. This would mean that there really would not be any place for any wind farms in Nova Scotia anywhere. This BANANA attitude looks good on you!
Alex Dunlop
To yet another anonymous:
Is a Dork Dunlop a new kind of snow tire? I need a set and should check it out.
I ran Google searches for red mallard Nova Scotia , red mallard and mallard, Somebody call Andy Jones this bird is really rare. Petersons doesn't mention ol' red and none of my Nova Scotia bird books do. If this is actually the red-neck mallard, our correspondent needent worry. They migrate in Dodge Powerwagons.
The comments, however, did spark my curiosity. The Atlantic migratorty flyway goes through Tidnish, about 50k from Pugwash. There are no "Important Bird Areas" in the area.Formac's guide notes three "hot birding" areas on the Northumberland Shore- the Missaguash Marsh, Caribou Provincial Park and Merigomish Island.
It looks like the biologist who did the bird part of the environmental study was right. So, therefore, is Alex Dunlop.
John McManus
I don't know what we would do without John actually sifting through the pages for truth and not narrow-mindedly searching for answers that point to your own predetermiened conclusions, like some other folks do on this blog.
Thank you John.
mR Macanus
you telling us that you can't hear 85 bD'S infersound and you can't feel it ,then where does it go?
You making it seem that infersound from the turbins is the same as the wind.
wWhy is people not feeling good that lives next to these.We don't get headaches when the wind blows around here.'
The wife sometimes gets them but she thinks its from thetv programs.My nieghbor has got a harley davis motorcycle and when he starts it our house shakes and the dogs up the roadbarks.it makes infersounds.he says he read it goes 89 debels loud.his ole lady says it starts the fridge sometimes.
Where you live?whats your phone number?are you nears pugwash?He wants to com over and show you.what you doin saturday night.
he cant 'come over till after the darts turnyement but he can bring some moere guys with harleys to show you .
even just sittin in idle you can shure feel it.Maybe somebodys doesn;'t know about this and they can help you understand better.
A new NIMBY website has arrived! Gerald Moffat introduced it on Radio Noon today.
They have done a clever thing with their webpage. No chance for comment is provided. This way, they control the agenda and idiots like me are shut up and out. However, I imagine the Preserve Wentworth Valley principals read this blog so; here we are.
Mr. Moffat, while worrying about moose extiction said not a word about the proliferation of huge holiday houses on the Station Road, around Folly Lake etc. Surely this appropriation of moose habitat should be stopped.
The Wentworth Valley has seen a lot of development. The ski hill, highway, chalets, blueberry plains,quarry, train tracks etc. should all be removed to preserve the valley. The valley residents ( part time ?) are definately putting the valley at risk.
By the way, I saw a young moose here in Thomson a couple of weeks ago. It was one of those clear days when I could see the wind turbines at Higgens Mtn. and Rodney on my morning walk with the dogs. The moose just looked at us, crossed the road in front of us and walked off into the woods.
Mr. Moffat suggested he believes the Higgens Mtn site is one of the eight already selected. The start of a group opposed now seems strange: that train may already have left the station
John McManus
Where is this blog that you are talking about John? There hasn't been a peep on this blog for weeks, which is like an eternity given the inherent whining that is usually present here.
I wouldn't be surprised if this group did start a blog or someone just like them where you couldn't post comments. It rides in line with the common thread of hyprocrisy that exists here and with this movement. They want democracy, but won't allow for free spreech.
I'd say this blog is closed for business.
Close the link to your propoganda, Lisa!
Sorry I tried to leave a message but it didn't post.
Try " Preserve Wentworth Valley "on Google.
John McManus
Thank you John for the info.
Checked out links to that association and found some of the worst propoganda since the cold war. The whole bit about shadow flicker causing skiers to lose control on the slopes really makes me laugh.
This whole movement that wants to prevent wind farms from being built in Nova Scotia should go around and buy up as much land as possible, because that is the only way they will prevent the planned developments. Because bytheir standards there is no such thing as a good project!
Post a Comment