The Facts

The following is a collection of responses to Horizon Wind’s recent statements.   The full nine page document can be downloaded in PDF format here.

Why is this called the Big Thunder Wind Park? Who named this?

This is misleading. The geography is completely wrong. It is on Mount Johnson, home of Loch Lomond Ski Area. A Park is what we will never have if this project proceeds!!

Fact

  • On April 12, 1988 a real park was proposed for the area bythen Alderman Ken Boschcoff: “City moves for Nor’Wester Range as possible area for a provincial park.”  Councillor Ian Angus is quoted as saying he wanted to protect this area “that our children and our children’s children can enjoy it long into the future”

 Horizon says Big Thunder Wind Park will provide power for 9000 homes in Thunder Bay.”p3

Facts

  • Northwestern Ontario (NWO) does not have the need for all the power we produce, or the ability to ship all the excess power to alternative areas. THIS IS WASTEFUL & UNNECESSARY!
  • Wind power costs over 2 times more than what OPG is paid for their power and 10 times what clean hydroelectric power can be produced for.
  • if private wind energy were to have priority, water will spill over the dams.

Horizon says            “One Turbine can produce enough clean energy to power 500 homes without producing any emissions or waste materials.”p3

Facts              

×      We are currently using green hydroelectric power dams that do not create any emissions or waste materials and, again, we have enough power, and we can’t use it all or ship it. This project is wasteful! 

×      No turbine is CO2 free.  All turbines require being manufactured, installed, and their concrete is incredibly CO2 expensive to produce.

Question

×      Will you provide a full life cycle analysis for the above issues and for the eventual decommissioning of the units?

Horizon says            “The City of Thunder Bay will be the first jurisdiction in Ontario to host

a wind farm on City-owned lands.”p3

Questions      

×      WHY are we the FIRST AND ONLY IN THE PROVINCE?  Who contacted whom?

×      Why don’t we join the 42 other Municipalities in Ontario who are doing due diligence by expressing their concerns and/or requesting the Province conduct health studies?

×      Why don’t we join the Canadian Federation of Municipalities request for a moratorium on wind development until a non-biased health study is conducted?

 

 

 


 

Horizon says            “Big Thunder Wind Park will displace 15,000 tons of carbon dioxide

every year, equivalent to taking 3000 cars off the road for the next 20 years.”p3

Facts 

×      This calculation is very strange as it is comparing the emissions of producing 27 MW by the worst polluter, coal power, to wind power. Hydroelectric power, of which NWO has more than enough, produces no CO2 emissions.

×      According to the City’s “Community Environmental Action Plan”, Thunder Bay’s green house gas emissions are 50% from natural gas and 21% from gasoline.  In order for wind energy to significantly reduce the GHG emissions here in Thunder Bay, the residents would have to replace any natural gas furnaces and appliances for electrical ones and replace their vehicles with electric ones.               

×      We in NWO create a small amount of CO2 only when the coal plants are operating 

×      Our 2 coal plants rarely operate.  There are plans to convert them to burn biomass and therefore will be carbon neutral soon.

 

 

Horizon says            “Less than 2% of the lands in the project area will be required for the

turbines and access roads.  The rest will remain forested and untouched.”p3

Questions

×      So why, if we have all this 17,000 acre area, have they chosen the 2% closest possible to homes, businesses, schools and recreational areas?

×      Why are they so close to the cliff where birds live and hover and where rare maple trees as well as white pines and other rare species exist?

Horizon says            “This project will cost $75 million.  Of that, $15 million will be injected

into the local economy.  The remaining 80% are costs for towers, blades, and generators, which Horizon Wind Inc. hopes to purchase from Ontario.”p3

Questions

×      Where exactly do their figures come from?  Where will the $15 million be injected!

Horizon says            “Thirty direct (construction) and ninety (indirect) jobs will be created

in Thunder Bay.”p3

Questions     

×      What are these “indirect” jobs? Are they full time or temporary?

Fact                               

×      Short term, specialized out of town workers will arrive. Local jobs will be minimal at best.

Concern:  The Northwestern Ontario Region has a Generation Oversupply (p4)

 

Facts              

×      The statement as to the “Generation oversupply” is true at this time. 

×      Because of transmission line restrictions, there is no way to send the excess power to Southern Ontario who actually wants it.  There is 1500MW in the grid now and NWO is using only 650MW.  We generate 650 MW via green (water) power and 150MW via natural gas, and 517 MW via coal (which is not being used).  Again, we cannot ship our power to the south. Is the goal to replace our coal plant here in Thunder Bay? It hasn’t operated since February 2009; it is being converted to bio-mass so it will be “green”.  Further, it will still be required to back up the “wind farm” if constructed, as wind is variable.

 

 

 

 

 


Concern:  Health

Horizon says             “Many studies have been done to assess the potential impacts of wind

turbines on human health¼The evidence says wind farms are safe neighbours” (p4)

Facts              

×      There is no peer-reviewed study to substantiate this claim. No health study on human beings show that the turbines are safe to site within 2 kilometres of anyone’s home, school, business or recreational area.  

×      Health Canada recognizes that there is peer-reviewed scientific evidence that wind turbines have an adverse impact on human health.

×      There have been many wind turbine accidents reported in Canada and around the world.

×      A court application was filed in Ontario for a judicial review of the Green Energy Act 2009 based on the Precautionary Principle as it applies to industrial wind turbine installations.

×      The Canadian Federation of Municipalities has asked for a moratorium.

×      42 Ontario Municipalities have expressed their concerns about the impact of wind turbines on human health to the Province and asked for various things from a moratorium to conducting health studies.

×      Families in Ontario have had to vacate their homes after wind turbines were installed near them.

×      Wind Companies have purchased homes and installed gag orders. 

Horizon says            “The alternatives are coal and nuclear¼the province’s coal plants kill

 668 people a year”(p5)

Question

×      Why is no mention made of water power which is green and exists in abundance in NWO?              

Facts  

×      The fact is that coal plants “contribute” to approximately 668 premature deaths.  This doesn’t negate the impact of coal on health.

×      Wind turbine accidents from ice throws and structural failure causing death are well-documented and on the increase.

Horizon says            “Based on all available scientific and medical information it is Canadian

 Wind Energy Association’s (CanWea) position that audible sounds

from wind turbines have no direct harmful affect whatsoever on human health.”(p.5)

Facts              

×      CanWea is not a government agency as some might think by their name.  It is in fact a lobby group who advocates for the wind industry.

×      There are many health issues associated with audible sounds from wind turbines.

Horizon says     “The basis of health concerns revolve around the claim that wind

turbines cause low frequency sound waves inaudible to the human ear.”(p. 5)

Fact               

×      Well stated. In fact, the health effects on those subjected to long and frequent periods of pulsating, low-frequency noise associated with wind turbines include sleep disturbances leading to depression, chronic stress, migraines, nausea and dizziness, exhaustion and anger, memory loss and cognitive difficulties, cardiac arrhythmias, increased heart rate and blood pressure.

 

 

 

 


Horizon quotes       Dr. Chief Medical Officer of Health Dr. Arlene King in October 2009 memorandum

to Medical Officers of Health and Environmental Health Directors throughout Ontario that;  “there is no scientific evidence, to date, to demonstrate a causal association between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.” (p.5)

Fact

×      Dr. King then contradicted herself one month later by telling the legislative committee she wants more information about health effects of wind turbines:  “what we’ll be doing, when time permits is having a thorough discussion with all of the medical officers of health in this province about the existing information we have on any possible health effects related to wind turbines and determining whether any additional research needs to be done.”

 

Horizon quotes       Dr.Geoff Leventhall “I can state that there is no significant infrasound from

current designs of wind turbines.  There will not be any effects from infrasound from turbines.” (p.5)

Facts

×      G. Leventhall PhD is from the U.K.; he works for wind energy companies as a noise consultant.

Dr. Leventhall has also stated the exact opposite opinion: “Infrasound exposure is ubiquitous in modern life…it is common in urban environments, and as an emission from many artificial sources:                …industrial machinery, …air movement machinery including wind turbines, …the effects of    infrasound or low frequency noise are of particular concern…” (May, 2003)

×      People have abandoned their homes, been bought out by Wind Companies, been silenced by contracts.

×      There are over 100 people claiming adverse health effects from Wind Turbines in Ontario alone.

×      There has never been an independent study conducted.

Horizon says             “Health concerns surface in countries that do not have wide adoption of the wind

turbines, however countries that have decades of experience, do not express any issues.”(p.6)

Facts              

×      There are over 370 grassroots coalitions from 20 European countries demanding a halt or larger setbacks for the safety of the citizens.

×      Setbacks are greater in many European countries and have been continually increased.

×      The Chair of Energy Policy in the Danish Parliament calls it a “terribly expensive disaster.”

Concern:  The placement of Wind Turbines will destroy the land and trees

 

 

Horizon says            “The Environmental Assessment ensures the proposed wind project does not

 pose risk to the local habitat.”(p.6)

Facts

×      The environmental assessment is only as good as the studies that are done and the experts who are utilized.

×      McGuinty’s Green Energy Act replaced the normal Full Environmental Assessment process and many feel it was rushed and has not followed the Precautionary Principle.

×      A lawsuit against the province stating the Precautionary Principle was not followed in developing the Green Energy Act has been brought forth by Ian Hanna and his lawyer Eric Gillespie.

Horizon says            “There are already existing trails in this area; however people use the lands

 illegally.”(p6)

Questions     

×      If the land is city-owned and citizens are using them, how is this illegal?

×      Why does the City not provide access to this unique piece of city-owned land for its citizens to enjoy?

×      Why won’t our City study the potential of this beautiful asset as it has studied the Waterfront?

Facts              

×      A typical forest walking trail is irrelevant to a huge construction project such as this. Sixty-six foot wide roads are needed to bring up all construction equipment, 500 tons of equipment per turbine. The destruction will be irrevocable. 

×      This project will increase liability by opening these trails to become the “superhighways” needed for construction.  Young people will now have greater access to use them as raceways, party places, etc.

Comment

×      It should be illegal to destroy this land for future generations. 

 

 

Horizon says            “The predominant area of Sugar Maple is found on Square Top Mountain, several

 km from the site.  Horizon Wind will try to replant any that has been cut down

 during construction.”(p.6)

Facts                              

×      There are more rare Sugar Maples on this site than on Square Top Mountain. This is the most northern point in North America for this species.         

×      Replanting rare Sugar Maples to reach their present grandeur would take over 150 years and wind turbines have lasted only 20 years on past projects.

×      The turbines are located in an area where there are 10-30% Sugar Maple trees and access roads may be going through areas with more than 40% Sugar Maple trees.

×      The ANSI is LESS than 3 km away.

×      These trees will not grow on 1 metre of soil on top of concrete after the turbines leave. The ANSI was done over 20 years ago and clearly needs to be updated!

×      Many large majestic White Pine that are also found in this area are threatened.

 

Concern:  Animals

Horizon says             “Literature review and project survey show that the site is not a major migration

 route for birds.”(p.6)

Facts              

×      The wind turbines are a threat for more than just migration routes.

×      The most immediate threat is habitat loss and degradation on their breeding grounds, wintering grounds, and at migratory stopovers.

×      Birds often take advantage of an atmospheric phenomenon called thermals. This phenomenon may explain why raptors, such as our threatened Peregrine falcon may actually be ATTRACTED to the wind turbines.

 

Horizon says             “Bat collision is only a concern for migrating species.”(p.6)

Facts


×      Most bats don’t die from collisions (misleading statement); they die from barotrauma (internal haemorrhaging due to a sudden drop in air pressure). Barotrauma is a significant cause of bat fatalities at wind turbines.

 

 

Concern:  Wind turbines will have an effect on property value

Horizon says             “It has been found that in many cases prices actually increased faster in

 communities where wind farms are visible.”(p.7)

Questions

×    Will you put it in writing that our property values will not decrease and that, if they do, your company would compensate the land owner for their losses?

Facts 

×    The Canadian Federal Government states “there is evidence that both the visual and noise pollution do have an economic effect in the form of lowered property values…by 30% in the presence of wind turbines.”

×      Studies indicate properties will be devalued significantly for vacant and residential property in proximity to wind turbines. This devaluation varies between 15% and 45% depending on how close the turbines are to the affected property.  The effect on property values will be widespread.

 

 

Concern:  Wind farms are only operational 30% of the time

Horizon says             “A modern wind turbine will generate enough electricity to meet the demands of

 more than five hundred homes over the course of a year.”(p.7)

Fact

×      Wind turbines operate at an efficiency level between 25 – 40% which would equate to between 125 and 200 homes.  

×      The wind turbines do not produce a steady flow of power as the wind fluctuates. This destabilizes the power grid. Hydroelectric dams provide a constant, stable and inexpensive source of power.  

×      The intermittent nature of wind means other forms of generation will have to ramp up and down when the wind fluctuates. The only generation capable of this is fossil, meaning gas and coal or biomass (after 2014). These generators are made to run at 80% of capacity or better; when they ramp up and down they produce more carbon dioxide than if they run at design output. This means wind power causes more carbon dioxide output from these plants than if there is no wind power.

 

 

Concern:  Distance

 

Horizon says             “the setback guidelines are set provincially¼there is a minimum of 550 setback

from homes and 40 dBA limitation. “The Big Thunder Wind Park is proposed to be 600 metres from the nearest home”(p.7)

Facts

×      Ontario is new to this.  We need to learn from past practices. 

×      UK Noise Association: 2006 “It would be prudent that no wind turbine should be sited closer than 1 mile (1600 metres) from the nearest dwelling.”

×      France, March 2006: Setback is 1.5 km (1500 metres) until the completion of an epidemiological study to determine health effects.

Horizon says             “Horizon Wind’s noise study show that they (setback guidelines) are beyond the minimum requirements at 35dBA” (p.7)

Question

×      Will you put in writing that it will never exceed 35dBa?

 

Horizon says                 “less than twenty homes are within a one-kilometer radius of the closest

 turbines”(p.7)

Question

×      Are 20 homes and the citizens of this city dispensable? Precautionary Principle should apply here.

Facts

×      Shear Wind, a Canadian wind developer, recently agreed to redesign a proposed wind farm to assure no turbines are any closer than 1.4 kilometres from a residence.

 

 

Horizon says             “The closest turbine to Loch Lomond Ski Hill is located approximately 150

meters from the border of the nearest slope.  There are currently no provincial provisions for setbacks to ski hills.”(p.7)

Questions

×      Who will guarantee (in writing) that 150 metres is safe for skiers and workers at Loch Lomond Ski Area?

Facts              

×      There are no other ski areas in North America with an industrial wind farm.  The detrimental effects to skiers and workers have not been studied. This is, at best, an experiment.

×      Accidents have occurred involving ice throws and signs posted by other wind farm developers warn people to stay away much farther than 150 metres.

×      Australia is presently conducting an investigation of worker and business safety issues around wind turbines to ensure workers are equally protected; not simply landowners. 

Horizon says             “There are currently no provincial provisions for setbacks to ski hills, however

the setback from provincial roads is the length of the wind turbine blades plus ten meters.  The blades for the proposed turbines are 38.55 meters in length.”(p.7)

Facts

×      Signs outside wind turbine installations warn people to stay back 305 metres due to the possibility of ice throws.

×      Loch Lomond Ski Resort receives over 70,000 skier visits per year. These skiers would be only 150 metres away from a wind turbine and have no roof over their heads. They would be in constant danger of being hit by an ice throw.

×      As of July 2008 Hydro One increased setbacks to the edge of right of way for 500 kV assets (critical assets) to 500 metres,  230 KV (redundant assets) to 250 metres, and 115 kV assets (inconvenience but not significant) to 150 metres.

×      It is interesting that Horizon recommends 150 metres to protect the lives of skiers and workers compared to the 500 metre safety setback that Hydro One calls for to protect its critical assets.

 

Concern:  Shadow Flicker

Horizon says             “Only 19 receptors were identified to experience shadow flicker ¼maximum

 worst case scenario is six hours of flicker over an entire year.”(p.7)

Questions:    

×      Are we to assume “receptor” means people?  Or does “receptor” refer to a household?

×      Were the people skiing, who must concentrate, considered receptors? 

×      Can we have a guarantee in writing that this will not be a detriment to business as you claim?

Images:  Visual Simulations of Big Thunder Wind Park (p.8-15)

 

×      The photos are intentionally deceiving to minimize the reality.

×      Horizon uses a lot of technical jargon to convince us that they are providing photos with accurate placement and size of the turbines.  However, Horizon has not been clear or accurate concerning location, size and scale of the turbines.

Quick Facts

 

Horizon says             “In Ontario the minimum distance between a turbine and a house if 550 metres,

this is four football fields.  The minimum setback distance for a provincial highway (a source of constant noise) is 50 meters, or half a football field” (p.16)

True BUT       Roads are zoned Industrial.  This area is Recreational where people come to “re-create” their lives and enjoy the natural aspects of the area.

 

Horizon says             “Countries like Denmark already get 20% of their electricity from Wind.”

True BUT       Its electricity generation costs are the highest in Europe (15 cents/kwh compared to Ontario’s current rate of about 6 cents and NWO’s rate of 4 cents).  The Chair of Energy Policy in the Danish Parliament calls it “a terribly expensive disaster”

Horizon Wind Inc./Big Thunder Wind Park Community Consultation (p.17) 

FACT                              

×      Poor job of Public Consultation as so few people knew of this project, including City Council.  Notices were not mailed to all 200 homes within 2 kilometres of the proposed project and this size of mailing area is grossly insufficient.  Residents will sign affidavits stating this.  Who do you trust?  Your neighbours or a non-local company making money from this project.

______________________

What does Horizon say about tourism or recreation?         Nothing

What does Horizon say about Professional Recruitment and Retention to this Area?  Nothing

 ”People may be reasonably happy with one or two wind farms carefully sited in particular places. But as more and more farms are added over time their tolerance likely will diminish. In Australia the experience has been that once an initial wind farm has been built, that very quickly gets added to and can double or triple in size quite rapidly. The other issue is that towers are getting bigger all the time so that people may well be reasonably tolerant of wind farms that they have seen but are not aware that future towers will be very much larger.”

Dr. David Mercer, a world-renowned expert on environmental issues, including wind farms and a Professor at the royal Melbourne Institute of Technology in Australia

What does Horizon say about future plans or a possible phase 2? Nothing 

Is the plan to put in this extensive infrastructure for 18 turbines?  Shelburne, Ontario started with 45 turbines and now has 133.

WHAT DOES OUR COMMUNITY WANT FOR THE NOR’WESTER MOUNTAIN RANGE?     Industrial Wasteland or Recreational Area/Park

Responses

  1. What’s the rush? Can we not have time to look before we leap?

  2. This section should not be called ‘the facts’ as not one source was referenced, therefore this is nothing more than an opinion piece.

    • Good point Dave. It has been noted and we’re in the process of publishing content with references.

  3. With so much discussion, the most significant comment that I’ve heard on this issue is from one the the lawyers in attendance at the ward meeting that this City must be aware of a potential malpractice lawsuit. Is this possible? It should trump any future development hands down, if it is.

  4. Mr Ken Boschkoff suggested a National Park encompassing the Nor Westerns
    Guess what? It did not get very far as the some of the same people opposed that idea then.

  5. Several times this page of opinions resorts to the juvenile response of “put it in writing” with the inane belief that the wind group should be responsible for property values when anyone with any idea of property values knows that there are many, many factors that affect the values. Asking the wind power group to be responsible for your property values shows that this group’s primary interest is financial and not ecological.
    “Will you put it in writing that our property values will not decrease and that, if they do, your company would compensate the land owner for their losses?”
    The arguements presented are weak and the suppositions lack any evidence.
    The chance to reduce our dependance on fossil fuels has to be explored and wind power needs a chance to be developed. Not moving forward with this will be a missed opportunity for Thunder Bay.
    We should be on the cutting edge and not put this on the back burner.

    • James, what is wrong with being concerned with your property values? Consider yourself just buying a house then finding out a few months later that it’s worth thousands less. Wouldn’t you be concerned? This project affects many people; both directly and indirectly. The primary interest is actually both, along with the health interest that you omitted. There are people there who are concerned that even if they want to move to get away from the turbines might have to endure a huge financial loss to do so. Why should they be 100% responsible for that loss?
      You comments about being weak are actually contradictory as you’ve provided nothing to support your claims. I hope we miss this opportunity. Have you even researched the costs of producing wind energy? Check out some recent news….a firm in Texas backed out of an 8 billion dollar wind project becuase they couldn’t see the cost effectiveness of the project. Ontario is notorious for jumping on the technology band wagon too late in the game. Just as the US was getting out of nuclear energy Ontario decides to build the last one in North America. And, look how that’s going. That information is in writing. There’s nothing juvenile about rejecting blind faith in a company who have been nothing but evasive in future plans for this area.

  6. To Norwesterescarpment, whoever you are that won’t post with your real name… maybe I’m one of the few people in the world that has lost money on a house that I lived in, due to other factors that did not include a wind turbine.
    Property values are not based on a singular principle for increase or decrease.
    Duh!
    You posted several pages of opinion and I commented… if you would like a debate, then reveal who you really are.
    I am a private citizen, not associated with the turbines in any whatsoever, but your site makes me want to support the wind farm more and more with your unfounded arguements and personal attacks.
    You want to talk health?!What about fossil fuels that are mainstay of power forThunder Bay? Do you really want to dam all the rivers and destroy that aspect of tourism?
    I have looked at wind power on many sites on the internet as I said in my original post, it needs development, it’s obviously not perfected but somebody has to step up and take the risk and initiative.
    This is site smacks of businessmen who did not get their cut.
    That’s my opinion, if you want to attack me further, then I guarantee you will only alienate more people, not just me.

    • The purpose of this site is not intended to start a mud sling. I was not attacking you. Instead, defending your attacks of “juvenile responses”. What type of response would be appropriate to your earlier post? I thought it was responded to in a professional manner. From past experiences anonymity prevents this from becoming a personal attack. However, if you would really like to discuss this further you can provide conact information (email) and I’d be happy to discuss this offline.

      I agree that property values are based on many different factors. Most are based on market trends which are not preventable. This factor is preventable. I too am a private citizen and live miles away from the area in question. If somebody has to step up and take the risk who is it to say who takes the risk? Is that fair? All I am saying is that the studys are inconclusive on both sides. There has been enough research and feedback from people who embraced the technology originally, then had a change of heart down the road. More and more people are coming forward with the same theme. How many people need to be effected by this for the government to take notice?

      We have lots of land in this area. Why there? Horizon had other areas planned but changed their mind. And, they did it behind closed doors. I (and I think I can speak for the group) am not totally opposed to wind energy. I say not totally as new data is coming in saying how expensive it is. Sure, it’s cleaner than coal but, can we afford it. We’ve been saying it all along. It just so happens to be in the Norwester area. If it were Shuniah, I’d be saying the same thing. Turbines don’t belong close to where we live. j

      California has a whole string of wind farms. But, they’re in the middle of nowhere; off the freeways miles from civilization. It’s probably windier in San Francisco but they wouldn’t dare put them on their skyline, so why do we have to sprinkle them on ours. We have lots of windy space.

  7. I searched for the 8 billion dollar Texas deal… did you read it?

    “T. Boone Pickens has temporarily shelved plans to build the world’s biggest wind farm in the Texas Panhandle because of tight credit markets and low natural gas prices, and his company Mesa Power is looking for other projects that could use the $2 billion worth of wind turbines already on order. ”

    There are over 2,000 turbines in Texas! Sounds like a success story somewhere in there?
    The only reasons are business… money… not environmental concerns…. so… you have revealed yourself for what you are. A business group and not an environmental group.
    As I said, I really have nothing to do with the wind group but their arguements aren’t disguised under a veil of environmental concerns. You want to dam the rivers and burn coal?!?
    Sorry… you have lost me to the windy side of the hil and I won’t be skiing south of town or eating at that roadhouse restaurant again because of the poor attempt to hide their business motives.

    • Yes, I did:
      NPR/Associated Press:
      T. Boone Pickens has spent $60 million in the last year promoting the “Pickens Plan,” an idea for a giant wind farm in Texas. Now, the billionaire oil man is saying he will postpone the project for at lesat a couple of years. The first hints that things weren’t going as planned came last November, when Pickens couldn’t get a loan to finance the farm. Pickens made the delay official yesterday, blaming the tight financial markets and trouble distributing the energy that was to be generated. The 81-year-old Pickens was valued at $3 billion in 2007.
      Today, Pickens’ told NPR that people still want renewables and that the wind farm will someday come to fruition. Until then, though, he’s still touting natural gas as a replacement for oil and said he would find places to install the 667 wind turbines that he had already ordered for the farm.

      ….That’s quite a different spin than the one you provided. Regardless, my point was that the turbines there are not cost effective. They could have 4,000 turbines…that doesn’t mean it makes fiscal sense!

      This is a business issue alright…..Horizon Wind Inc. CEO Anthony Zwig is a real estate developer in Toronto who has never successfully completed a wind turbine project (not to be confused with Horizon Wind US). They/he is taking advantage of the incentives in place by the Ontario Government to make significant profit, which in itself is not necessarily bad, unless it is at the detriment of others. It’s surprising that the city would enter into an agreement with a company with no track record, that offers no performance bond or no limits as to the number of turbines, and nothing but vague promises as to decommissioning. Like the grain elevators, we’ll be stuck with them when they pack up and leave in 20 years.

      You are entitled to your opinion and that is why we print it. By igoring some of the key points we’ve been trying to make here it is obvious you are only trying to discredit two businessmen and not constructively disscuss the issue of wind energy in the area. That’s is not what this forum is about. Thank you for your comments and I wish you the best in your endevours.

  8. Industrial wind turbine developments (IWTs) are about selling an industry to make money and not about supplying electricity or about long term economic benefits to communities. If it was about producing power or long term economic benefits we would not be considering IWT developments. The initial money injected into Thunder Bay will come eventually from within our tax system and consumers from higher electricity prices. We are their source of money and IWT companies are in it to make money. IWT companies are rushing to get into the system as soon as possible before someone in our Government gets the guts to close the door on the free for all government spending or before the money runs out. So for those that think getting wind turbines in Thunder Bay or anywhere in Ontario are great economic boosts make sure you know who is paying for these things to be built. When electricity on the market is going for less than 4 cents per kW/h on the open market realize we will be paying more than 12 cents (plus the tax breaks and subsidies) for a short term supply of intermittent, unreliable electricity produced by IWTs that require an equal amount of back up generation capacity (real capacity) to ensure grid stability (IWTs are not a sole source and have never replaced or shut down one single coal fuelled generation unit in the world). The up frount costs (we will be paying for) and operational cost (we will pay for) do not include the costs to decommission the turbines (maybe as soon as 10 years) which the companies seem to think will happen with no financial commitment from them (we will pay for decommissioning if we want it to happen). The little bit of IWT electricity produced will mean much higher electricity prices and lost government spending in other programs. What consumer or industry or business think present electricity bills are too low and want to pay a lot more for the illusion of green?

  9. The Pickens Plan is and was an ” inspiration” to reduce US dependancy on fossil fuels.
    Let me add pickens is a might smarter then you, who ever you are. And he HAS spent millions of his own money on this project YES HIS OWN. He made his money through oil , and now wants to promote a better way. ( I recently saw him interviewed)
    Mr Pickens idea was to reduce dependance on fossil fuels , and create jobs and keep US money from flowing to the middle east a sound idea . And make clean energy.

    The only way to fund huge projects investment.
    Is their something wrong in that??Thats the way the world works and if that bothers you go live in a cave.( and God forbid dont put money into investments)
    The plan was alway a hard sell due to the american dependance on oil and the infrastructure that oil has , that makes it easy to get to the smallest consumer.
    Also green doesnt sell( doesnt seem to in your area)
    The wall street crash put paid to his idea FOR NOW.
    To discredit his plan because he could find no investors does not mean its a bad or flawed plan.

    Or that wind power is bad , which you seem to think , as I have read your statements and you seem to imply this rather continously.
    So yes, at this time a barrel of oil is cheap(er) again . BUT JUST WAIT.

    Hey and guess what , windmills added bonus , they do POLLUTE LESS.
    Ever heard of global warming, Show your kid a polar bear wont be around long. Will your kids , kids??? When the seychelle islands are under water will you care???

    I think its better to stick to your argument of ” I dont want it in my view” because the way you argue its seems you dont care about the rest if the world outside that nieghbourhood.

    • You sound very angry HeldHostage. I don’t understand why you rudely make arguments to things we’re in agreement with. You obviously haven’t read much here as we are not against wind energy; only the location. Let me reprhase the Pickens story so that it’s easier for you to understand. The point being made was that the company couldn’t find a feasable way to complete the project. It was too expensive. It will be expensive here. And, we already have cheap power. If we have to go that route, then let’s plan it properly. There’s more to it than view. Feel free to read on throughout the site to see what I’m talking about.

  10. Guess what? All said and done, isn’t the oil spill in the Gulf in our back yard.
    Whooping Cranes, Canadian Geese and many other migratory birds spent their winter in the Gulf area. On top of that isn,t that where the snowbirds migrate to enjoy the beaches and weather.
    What is more devastating? the oil spill in the Gulf or green energy produced by wind power.

    • What’s your point? Your comments turn this into a very broad issue that allows you to compare any world event to something happening locally. We can’t control what goes on in the gulf or anywhere else in the world. But, we can try and influence change in our area. Please read some more on this site. I said it a hundred times on this forum that you will see that we’re not against green energy; just the placement. Personally, I think it’s a huge money grab from a greedy southern Ontario real estate developer who could care less about us. I also don’t think we need the power. But, if they’re going to put them up put them far away from where anyone lives.

  11. If you guys are so against this wind farm, then argue the points your trying to support about them being to close to residential areas. Don’t critique every part of Horizon’s plan that has noting to do with why you really don’t want to see the wind turbines on the Nor’Westers. Grow up and learn how to argue people, its reality. It’s uneducated poeple like you who find every last bit of there knowledge on google that try to put up a fight against trained professionals in the business. Think all your effort will work? goodluck!

    • Thank you for your interest in our site. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. I am curious to know what is wrong with outlining faults in Horizon’s plan and why we should stick to one topic. Please explain.

      As for being educationed perhaps we’re not but, I do believe “Genius” doesn’t have an “o”, “their knowledge” needs an “i”, and “professionals” should be singular. Thanks again for your post.

  12. I asked a question on the “stop the placement of the wind turbines on loch lomond and big thunder” Facebook page and now find that I have been removed and blocked from that group for no apparent reason. Hopefully I can receive a response here to the question I posed. It was claimed that the wind turbines would now be 700 feet in height. I asked if I could receive a link to verify that information, and also how many of the proposed turbines would be at that height. From my reading of publicly available information, the maximum height of the towers (including blades) is 457 feet.

    • Wayne, from what I understand your comments were not appreciated by the gentleman that manages the Stop the Placement of the Wind Turbines Facebook page, I have no affiliation with that page.

      The information pertaining to the 700+ foot turbines are based on information provided by the city of Thunder Bay and Horizon themselves. Then again, Horizon is famous for handing out misinformation on a regular basis, they’ve refused to answer numerous questions (dozen’s if not a 100+).
      You’ve made it more than clear both here, Tbnewswatch and the Facebook pages that you are dead set against the NWEPC group which is fine, that’s your right. We have never blocked any of your posts.

  13. So it is obvious that Dan Fiorito has not allowed my last comment to be posted. Did he consult with all members of this site before making such a decision?

    • Wayne, you’ve made your points very clear, you’re in favor of the project, you tend to nitpick everything we say and post. As you’ve been told in the past, everyone has their own reasons for being against this project, because some don’t always mesh with the others you seem to think there’s this great divide in the group. The NWEPC is made up of a wide variety of individuals, Lawyers, University Professors, Doctors, IT Specialist and a host of other professional services, we are not simply a bunch of uneducated NIMBY’s as so many put it.

      We have NEVER blocked any of your posts here on the site, because we don’t responded within a timeframe of your liking, does not mean we’re blocking them, we all have personal lives and I will respond when I have time. As one of the moderators of the site I have full control over what posts get approved and we have NEVER disallowed a post. We believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion; you want to rant and rave about the benefits of Wind, go nuts, no one is disagreeing with it.

      I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the NWEPC is NOT against wind power despite what you think and post about us. We are against this project, the company, the way the city handled this entire deal from day one. Industrial Turbine installations do not belong in residential areas. The fact that the Province is paying 10x the going rate to these companies, they’re paying other provinces and states to take our excess are ridiculous. The provincial Liberal party will feel the same fate that the Federal one comes October.

  14. Dan, I have not said that I am dead set against this group. However, I am disappointed that many questions are deflected or responded to with a very dismissive, “do your research” I have also not referred to this group as being comprised of a bunch of uneducated NIMBYs. Is the gentleman in question who is the creator of that FB group also a member of this group?

  15. Not affiliated with that FB group?

    • I believe he lives in the area, however I have never seen him at any meetings. Therefore I would not consider him a member of the “core group” which consists of about 10 people with three being the official names on paper. We have our own page on Facebook. I think it’s great that he has done this on his own.

  16. “Wayne, you’ve made your points very clear, you’re in favor of the project, you tend to nitpick everything we say and post.”

    I never once declared that I am in favour of the project. However, I have declared that I am in favour of renewable energy sources such as wind. Yes, as an educated and informed individual I tend to ‘nitpick’ when it comes to facts, figures and data. Does not this group claim to have nitpicked the project, but has not revealed the nitpicky items?

    • Wayne, you tend to post here, TBNewswatch and other places I’m sure and you’ve made it clear, or it appears, based on a number of comments you’ve made on other peoples posts that you are of the opinion that we are wrong. You keep saying we provide conflicting information. What is conflicting? Because one individual state their fear of health issues and another member doesn’t consider that a priority is not in our opinion conflicting information (this is just an example). We are entitled to our own opinions and concerns. The collective as a whole have clearly stated that we are against this project for a variety of reasons; location, the way the deal was made, lack of consultation by the city, loss in property values (ask someone trying to sell their house out here if its affected the sale), Horizon and they way the treated the residents. They claim to be go good corporate citizens, yet on the other hand they sue us (as well as other municipalities).

      We form our opinions based on facts that we have research either via the internet, special interest groups, speaking to various groups who have experienced similar issues, yet everyone says “well, if it’s posted on the CANWEA site it must be true” Canwea is sponsored by and paid for by companies that own turbines, did you know that Ontario government allowed the Wind Industry to write all of their own guidelines for themselves? The information they provided is very bias towards them.

      Every major city in Ontario with the exception of Thunder Bay have all placed a moratorium on the development of wind farms, the provincial government themselves have place a moratorium on developing wind farms on the lakes, why? They feel the 5km set back is not far enough, yet a 560m setback is ok for residential areas? The Lakehead Board of Education has requested a moratorium, yet the city ignored them.

      These types of projects do not belong in residential areas, plain and simple. This is a residential neighborhood. I can assure you, if these were placed anywhere else in the city that area would be doing the same. The city has also set a dangerous precedence here, what’s to stop any other company from purchasing a plot of land in the City and putting up dozens of these? All they have to do is point to the Horizon project and they’ll win. How come if I want to build a shed in my back yard, I have to jump through hoops, need to confer with my neighbors to ensure it’s not a “blight” on the area, if one resident is against it, they’ll kill my project.

      I suggest you attend one of the groups meetings, there held the first Thursday of every month at the South Neebing Community Centre. There one tonight at 7:00pm

  17. Dan, before blanket labeling me as dead set against this group, perhaps you should refresh your memory of past comments I made within this group, especially this one from Oct 2010:

    Thanks Dan. Opinions are neither right nor wrong, but ‘facts’ and data can be misrepresented. Having said that, I am pleased and in full agreement, after watching last night’s council meeting, with the amendment to the potential lease agreement of NOT providing Horizon with the green light to cut one single tree down, or proceed with any construction activities or site preparations without first receiving ALL approvals from the REA process.

    Also, despite the denial of certain members of our elected municipal government, this wind park proposal IS political given the looming election process. And I say that in terms of both sides of the argument for and against the wind park development.

  18. Dan, not able to attend the meeting tonight, but will consider attending the one next month.

    Shall have to review your replies in full when I log on next time.

    Thanks

    Wayne

  19. I believe the gentleman in question who without rational cause removed and banned me from the group lives in South Neebing. Before I was banned I had read references to him being a cook/chef at the Neebing Roadhouse, as well as having some property in South Neebing on which he hopes to some day build a house. You live in the same area, yes?

    As an example of what I mean by conflicting information, I shall comment on another post on this group’s web site which is conflicting, and at least does not respond to my earlier question about how many of the 16 towers will be 700′ tall.

    A provincial moratorium on wind turbines on lakes is another example of conflicting information/opinions of this group. I have read many opponents say, “place them near the lake”….do you see what I mean by conflicting information?

    • See my answer under the True View Shed post for answers. The guy who chose to ban you did so for what he felt were valid reasons, we have no control over him. If you want continue to post your babling here, please feel free do do so and I’ll continue to post it. But like I said, your nit-picking and grasping at straws for information. We had no control over the moratoriums the Province takes, we do question a lot of the decisions. Opponents can say what they wish, just as we do. Welcome to the FREE WORLD where that’s allowed. Based on your suggestions we should all think the same, be as one…sounds like the Borg to me.

  20. And this youtube link which you posted on that Facebook page is just bad science and misrepresenting the effects of EMF from a substation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faEo2-o8FGM&feature=youtu.be

    • How is that misrepresenting the facts? Take the time to talk to the people who live in Orangville or Wolf Island and any other area where these are built close to residental areas. These people are suffering real effects from these projects, despite what a provincially paid Doctor says. This is the same doctor that stood before the House of Commons and admited that some of the information that she “approved” was not backed by scienes. Again… you think that the entire group of people in the country should all be of one mind and sole (again, reference the BORG).

  21. Dan, I said it was bad science and misrepresenting the effects of substations in general. As you read on that FB page, I explained why it is bad science. Firstly, the woman claims to be within 400 metres of a substation from a windfarm (she does not claim where this experiment is taking place). The only way to get a bulb like that to have a faint glow (amplified by night vision camera), in dark night conditions, is to be very near said substation. This is a demonstration that has been shown many times before with simply rubbing an inflated balloon up and down the bulb, or walking across a carpeted floor in wool socks while holding the bulb. The reality is that ALL substations/transformers produce the same effect whether they are substations for wind, solar, hydro, whatever source of electrical transformation. We are ALL exposed to more EMF from the devices we run in our homes than a transformer located hundreds of meters away. Not sure where you are going with your Trek Borg comment, but it is not a legit comeback nor argument.

    • Wayne, one of the pionts you stated in this is the fact that the substation is 400m from her house, the legal standard is 500m and yet the province is totally ignoring the fact that these stations are built outside of the standards, yet more of the provinces “doesn’t matter” attitude. Have you ever seen one of these specific transformers? they hum like theres no tomorrow, but it doesn’t matter, why? because the province says its all for the greater good. Right!

  22. Dan, I am disputing and challenging the ‘trick science’ of the bulb. The author of the video does not state how far away from the substation she is during the ‘experiment’. However, she would need to be fairly close to get the results depicted in the video under dark conditions. As I mentioned, all substations, whether they are wind, solar, hydro or otherwise would create the same effect. And as I have mentioned previously, there is more EMF created within our homes, and from other electric sources such as overhead wires, transformers etc.

    • So tell me Wayne, did you attend the information session on Monday?

  23. By information session, do you mean the anti-wind rally? and the session where there was negative chanting about the Liberals?….If so, no I did not attend that nor the two open houses hosted by Horizon due to conflicting work shift schedules. But I fail to see how that is a response to my challenging the ‘experiment’ depicted in the video.

    • I was referring to all of them. You want the argument on the video, I’ll give it to you, not worth the keystrokes. The chanting you refer to was something that was done by the visiting speaker, it was his choice, not ours. Did we chant? Sure, why not, you get caught up in the moment, besides, it was simply message to them, nothing more. (remember that free speech thing I mentioned) The Green Energy Act which was created by the current government (with a great deal input by the Wind Industry I might add), is a scary thing. If they can simply trample your rights in the name of Green Energy, what next? Good example? Mayor riled by solar farm How about someone doing that next door to your house, personally, I’m in favor of Solar, but by allowing someone to do something such as this is just plain wrong and tramples one’s rights as a citizen of this province.

  24. Dan, chill out dude! You say you don’t want to waste keystrokes on my challenge of the ‘false science’ depicted in the video you posted….fine, that just reduces your credibility with respect to scientific methodology. But apparently you will waste keystrokes on giving me a lecture on ‘free speech’ when I did not question the right to free speech at those meetings. So, you are pro-solar, but anti-wind, yes?

    • Wayne, my stance on the solar vs. wind is, they are both decent forms of alternate technology for power generation (however wind power is the least effective of them all), we need alternative sources including natural gas, biomass etc. I, like the rest of the NMEPC are not against wind technology, show me were it states that on this site? If you’re referring to individuals statements on various sites, I’ve discussed that on our front page. We are against the Horizon project in it’s current form, we are against the REA process as well as find several faults with the entire Green Energy Act which strips both individuals and cities/towns of their rights to question any of the processes in a meaningful way and let’s not forget how the city handled this from start to finish.

      We are here to protect the Nor’Wester Escarpment and not just the part in our back yard, but entire range from Mount McKay to as far south as Pigeon River (hence the name of the group).

      As for the sciences, I don’t think of it as false in anyway shape or form. It seems that no matter what information is presented, the pro side will find fault in it and vice versa, that’s what free speech is all about. You’re entitled to your opinions as are we. This fight we have is not just about Wind Turbines, it’s what started it and woke us up, but it’s gone way beyond that point now.

  25. Dan, I asked if YOU were anti-wind, not if this group was. And I never said that wind power generation was the panacea for our energy needs. I have said on a few occasions that our future energy resources are going to be a hybrid mix of wind, solar, biomass and other green technologies. As for that video, it is misleading, false, and not representative of real scientific methodology. You can argue the point that it is real science, but it is NOT. Critical thinking is lacking in the ‘experiment’ displayed in that video.

    • I’m not anti-wind, as I’ve mentioned in another post to you this evening. See that for my take on it.

  26. p.s. my comments were not opinion, but rather FACT based upon science. Do not confuse freedom of speech with proven fact and science. Also, if this group is not against wind technology, show me an instance or reference to a wind turbine farm that this group believes was sited in the best possible manner.

    • The Dorion Project. It’s well situated deep in the bush, far from residential areas. The township of Dorion was advised accordingly, they were properly consulted and the developer listened to them and their concerns.

  27. One point that i dont think has been discussed alot is the effects on the aviation community….these wind turbines are very tall on an already high surface. i live at the end of Feaver rd. and work in the aviation business, airtraffic routinely flies at low level over the mountains while on approach to the airport. Has transport canada been consulted about this? It is currently illegal to have a crane operating over certain hights within the vicinity of the airport so you can see the concern of a pilot having to navigate around these things.

    • Hi Kevin,
      I’m not sure what official talks have taken place, however Horizon claims they’ve spoken with Transport Canada on this and there is no issue, but they’ve made numerous claims that have later turned out to be false. Personally I can’t understand how they would allow it based on that, but this government has proven time and time again that the rules can always be broken when it suites them.
      Would that fall under Federal jurisdiction? I’m guessing it would. I know from my front window I often see planes fying over the escrapment at that range (500ft above the surface, of course this is just a guestimate), same with Helicopters are always flying really low in the area, not sure if they’re doing site seeing tours or work, but they definitely fly pretty low.

      Thanks for the question!
      Dan


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.