Loch Lomond - Looking east to phase one of the project
Looking north from Loch Lomond. If a 6ft person casts an evening shadow this large, imagine what shadow a 300ft turbine would cast!
You get the idea....
This is the view from what the turbines would see.
Judging from the sheer size of these turbines and their location, they will be visible from almost anywhere in the city. It’s obvious to me that this project should be a concern to all citizens of the city, not just in the area of the Nor’westers.
Helen
By: Helen on February 7, 2010
at 8:01 pm
i agree
By: stuie on January 18, 2011
at 5:07 pm
if you put the turbines on loch there will be NO SKIING OR SNOWBOARDING … think of the children srsly think about it.
By: fudgeking47 on January 18, 2011
at 5:15 pm
Fudgeking47, you are correct, in the event that this does go forward there is a good chance that the current ski hill may have to close due to its inability to obtain the proper insurance. This would be truly unfortunate as it would also put well over a 100 individuals out of work and create the loss of one of the few good ski hills left in the area.
By: Dan Fiorito on February 19, 2011
at 2:31 pm
Why not stick a bunch of these monstrosities (that are as big as Boing 747′s on a 75 metre tower) on the Sleeping Giant? It’s just as disgusting and destructive as what they are considering doing to the natural beauty of the Norwesters! If the push is for green energy, and if they are honest with Thunder Bay citizens that this will likely INCREASE their energy bills, then at least find a better site!!
By: Christine on February 12, 2010
at 4:33 pm
Good point Helen!! I hope ALL of the people of thunder bay will get a chance to vote on this.
By: Det.John Kimble on February 20, 2010
at 10:29 pm
I very much disagree with the location of the proposed turbines. There are much more suitable spots. However, I do feel that these wind turbines will create a positive step in improving the environment. Which is of course the overall point of ‘green energy’ is it not?
By: kym on August 5, 2010
at 7:01 pm
Honestly, people need to put aside trivial things such as a “view”, for the betterment of the environment. I moved here from Lethbridge Alberta where there are numerous wind turbines just outside of the city which is almost the same size as Thunder Bay.
This in the prairies where you “can see for miles”. Despite that, there was no problem with the city residents and surrounding communities to put them in. As a matter of fact they are all over southern Alberta and are a huge benefit to the environment (especially with the horrible tar sands up north).
It’s just another classic story of people being afraid of change. The environment is hurting, so we need to do everything we can to protect it!
By: Chris on August 6, 2010
at 12:34 am
Chris;
I totally agree with you. Your point being that the turbines in Lethbridge are outside the city limits. This project is within the city limits of Thunder Bay. It’s not a matter of being afraid of change. It’s a matter of a project being done properly, with consultation and research.
By: norwesterescarpment on August 12, 2010
at 12:41 pm
We had occasion to visit the Sarnia area recently and were absolutely appalled by the number of wind turbines located on acres and acres of farmland in that area. They were ugly, oppressive and downright depressing. I DO NOT want to see anything like this on our beautiful Norwesters or anywhere close to Thunder Bay. Why is this being forced on us when we don’t need the energy and we certainly don’t need the additional cost burden that will be imposed on us by Ontario Hydro should this project go through!
By: Louise Fisher on September 17, 2010
at 5:41 pm
Letter in today’s paper by Don McLeod says it all, folks! Read it and weep. If this project is allowed to go through, we’ll all be paying gargantuous subsidies (through Hydro) for years to come to line the pockets of private developers and all for something we do NOT need! And we get to destroy our beautiful Norwesters in the process, all for a green checkmark on McGuinty’s environmental slate. How brilliant are we? Who said that such alternatives would be cheaper???
By: Louise Fisher on September 19, 2010
at 3:41 pm
I had the pleasure of touring the norwester mountains and you would be loosing a great beauty. The maples are just gorgeous and once destroyed can not be replaced. These wind turbines will be destroying a natural beauty in an area that does not need any more power. The amount of wildlife that would also be displaced would also be of a great concern
By: angie on September 22, 2010
at 4:31 pm
I for one think these turbines are incredible and a thing of beauty. Such a engineering marvel and we get power from this. Most arguments are ridiculous and don’t hold water. I mean come on people complaining about shadows; displaced wildlife, not likely the wildlife here live right beside our towers and are not spooked at all. Some trees will come down , yes that happens, but htye can be replanted and it is not the whole forest coming down just a driveway. I live in the Chatham area and see the towers everywhere I drive, for me they are a thing of beauty and to be admired. Yes I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder but they are far from ugly. You all just have NIMBY syndrome, get over it.
By: Dave on September 28, 2010
at 12:50 am
Dave, thanks for writing. However, your NIMBY arguement holds no credibility. You say they’re beautiful as you drive by…that’s right, drive by. You see them for a few minutes then they’re gone. These people will have to wake up to them and end their evening with them every day of the year. Big difference.
By: norwesterescarpment on September 28, 2010
at 2:37 am
If the photoshopped wind turbine shadow (depending upon time of day/year) was over to the right a bit more, it would almost conceal the deforested scars of the ski runs, but not the chair lift.
By: WaYnE on October 20, 2010
at 1:35 am
What is your point Wayne? The photo was intended to show the effects of flicker, nothing more.
By: norwesterescarpment on October 20, 2010
at 1:17 pm
Note the viewshed of the ski hill scars in the majority of these photos, including the main photo used as the website header. Street lamps are also posing a viewshed issue.
By: WaYnE on October 20, 2010
at 1:42 am
WaYne, you’re kicking a dead horse here. Now you’re getting silly with your points.
By: norwesterescarpment on October 20, 2010
at 1:21 pm
The wind turbines should be put somewhere else Lock lohmand is for skiing snow boardind and tobing not to create energy. STOP THE WIND TURBINES!!
By: Jon on January 18, 2011
at 5:23 pm
I think that the wind turbines are a really bad idea. think about skiing, how many people that would have to go to a diffrent hill
By: stuie on January 18, 2011
at 5:23 pm