by SUSAN MANN
Cash crop and pork farmer Shawn Drennan can sum up his initial reaction to the Ontario Divisional Court decision dismissing a constitutional challenge to the wind energy regulatory project approval process in one word – disappointing.
But Drennan, who farms 300 acres in Huron County’s Township of Ashfield-Colborne-Wawanosh, says he has so far only taken a very “cursory glance” at the decision released Monday and wants to go over it in more detail after the holidays before commenting further. He says he’s uncertain about the amount of legal costs his group may be on the hook for.
Shawn and Tricia Drennan were one of four families launching the challenge. The families were challenging three different wind energy projects in Huron and Bruce counties. The panel of three divisional court judges was unanimous in dismissing the families’ appeal.
As for what their next step is, Drennan says “when we actually talk to our lawyers, we’ll probably sit down to figure that out. We haven’t decided where to go from here or what to do from here.” They also haven’t yet talked to the other families involved in the challenge.
The project being built near the Drennans’ farm will have 140 wind turbines and be 270 megawatts (MW). It’s being built by K2 Wind Ontario Limited Partnership, a partnership of Capital Power LP, Samsung Renewable Energy Inc. and Pattern Renewable Holdings Canada ULC. The other two projects are a 180 MW, 92-turbine project owned by Armow Wind Ontario LP and a 33 MW, 15-turbine project owned by St. Columban Energy LP.
K2 Wind spokesperson Michael Sheehan says they’re optimistic that the divisional court ruling “will finally put an end to the challenges brought against the regulatory approvals authorizing the construction and operation of K2 Wind.”
All three projects received their renewable energy approval in 2013 and 2014 under the Environmental Protection Act from the Environment and Climate Change Ministry. The families in this court case live close to the proposed sites of the wind turbines and are concerned about the potential health effects of living near the turbines. But since launching the challenge, one family, the Kroeplins, who lived near the Armow Wind Ontario project, has moved.
Sheehan says construction of K2 Wind’s project began in late 2013 and is on schedule. Commercial operation of the wind project will begin in mid 2015. So far, about half of the 140 wind turbines have been erected or assembled, he adds. The project will provide the average annual power needs for about 100,000 homes.
Through the Environmental Protection Act, the families sought review hearings of the environment ministry director’s decisions approving the projects. Those reviews were heard by the Environmental Review Tribunal. But in each case, the tribunal dismissed the families’ appeals, the divisional court written decision says. The tribunals found the families did not establish that the energy approval appeal provisions or the Act itself violated the families’ right to security of the person under Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The tribunals also found the families didn’t establish that engaging in the project as approved will cause serious harm to human health.
The Act “stipulates that the tribunal shall review the decision of the director and shall consider only whether engaging in the renewable energy project in accordance with the renewable energy approval will cause (a) serious harm to human health,” the decision says. Under the Act, the families had the responsibility of proving the projects will cause serious harm to human health.
After the tribunal made its decisions, the Act’s appeal rights enabled the families to bring those tribunal decisions to the court “on a question of law,” the decision says. The families were asserting that aspects of the process to review the environment ministry director’s decision are “constitutionally flawed,” especially the section that requires the families to demonstrate the projects would cause serious harm to human health.
The decision says for appeals like ones brought by the families challenging the wind energy project approvals process, the court can only consider questions of law. It cannot reweigh or reassess the evidence brought before the tribunals or the factual findings the tribunals made.
Part of what the families wanted was that section 145.2.1 (2) the Environmental Protection Act be declared constitutionally invalid. Another request was for the addition of an order to the Act saying the test to be met is whether there is a reasonable prospect of serious harm caused by engaging in the renewable energy project.
In its written decision, the judges said their purpose in describing the expert evidence before the tribunals on the impact of wind turbines on human health was a narrow one. Their job was only to identify that the tribunals didn’t have before them expert evidence that “seriously called into question” the principle underpinning of the Act’s renewable energy project regulatory regime. BF
Comments
Whether or not the developer won the day, we do not need this power. We are paying for power we don't and cant use that must be sold off to others at huge discounts. We are subsidizing our neighbours giving them a competitive advantage in the manufacturing sector!
Ontario's wind power contract prices of 13.5 cents are about 2.5 times that of similar U.S. contracts. That is before the unnecessary extra connection upgrades and backup power are factored in. To add insult to injury, we pay for the excess power then pay again for the U.S. to take it off our hands. Lately, the companies get paid for power generation based on wind speed, even though they are told to shut them down. And it doesn't stop there. Turbine property taxes are based on assessment of approx. $40,000.00 per megawatt or approx. 60 to 80 thousand assessment for something that cost in the millions to build. The really sad fact is there are thousands of these monstrosities and roads taking up an average of approx. 3 acres each to be built yet.
Agree completely on why we are subsidizing the building of more over priced power sources and then selling it to our southern neighbours at a loss. Also I wonder why I have called Ontario Hydro 4 times to get a lightning arrestor wire that blew off there transformer put back on . Is 6 months a little long too wait. And we pay them never less than $2k a month for power that used to cost $800 a month 10 yrs. ago. kg kimball
I suggest you call Hydro One and ask to speak to the local Linesmen office.
Ontario Hydro hasn't existed for at least 10 yrs.
perhaps the next step is to appeal the evaluation of the homes near the windfarms to see if they can get their taxes lowered.
I'm afraid that ship may have "already sailed" according to the latest official studies authorized by or done by MPAC
http://windfarmrealities.org/mpacs-2012-study/
Properties within 5km seemed to have a serious valuation decline, yet MPAC says no? You be the judge.
These Industrial wind turbines are taxed (Chatham-Kent) at much lower rates, than they should be taxed. They should face Commercial/Industrial tax rates which would be much more beneficial to the affected municipality. If you have to put up with them, they should be a windfall to the affected communities. Fair is fair.
The companies do offer hush money to municipalities . It was likely was part of the deal signed with Gov . Taxing of buildings and properties should not be some thing that is negotiable . As farmers we can't negotiate our taxes . Wind turbines are Industrial and should be taxed as such .
Have no fear though as we have our general farm orgs working on our behalf . First siding with Gov to support expensive green energy and now asking for cheap hydro rates , al the while not seeing the taxation problem and now asking for farmer lower tax rates . A good study would have revealed this you would think but then that would of been common sense .
Yup, that's what I'm going to do this coming week.
Yes, many are likely thinking the same thing.
Doing it alone is probably a waste of time. Doing it as a group or class action could well be productive.
I for one am not going to be interested in visiting the beautiful coast of Southern Ontario with all these HUGE STEEL INDUSTRIAL noise eye sores all over the place, what a joke. Property owners who are saying yes to this fraud should be TAXED DOUBLE what anyone else pays, that will cause them to think twice before they fall for the money joke scam ...sad.
YOU PEOPLE BEHAVE LIKE BABIES ,DO YOU KNOW THAT MOST OF THE COUNTIES IN THE WORLD ARE MOVING TO RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES !! JUST LIKE FARMER THAT HAVE MOVED TO NEWER AND CHEAPER WAYS TO FARM ,THE START UP COSTS ARE ALWAY HIGHER AND THE REWARDS ARE AS WELL !! NO BODY IS GOING TO SPEND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND GET NO PAY BACK FOR BEING FIRST !! YOU PEOPLE IAM SORRY TO SAY ARE IDIOTS !! THAT IS ALL I CAN SAY ,YOU COST THIS COMPANY , THE PROVINCE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN LOST TIME ,PRODUCTION AND JOBS ,IF ANYTHING THEY SHOULD BE SUEING ALL YOU FOR THE TIME ,COST DAMAGES YOU HAVE CAUSED THEM !! I USED TO FARM 1200 ac AND AM A STRONG SUPPORTER OF RENEWABLE ENERGY ,WE NEED TO BUILD FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS IF WE ARE TO COMPETE IN THIS GLOBAL MARKET ! ENOUGH TIME AND MONEY WASTED ,GET ON WITH FARMING ,LEAVE THE PRODUCTION OF ENERGY TO THE PEOPLE THAT PRODUCE IT AND INSTALL THE RENEWABLE POWER !! MOVE ON FARMERS !! BILL DENBY ,IMPORTER /EXPORTER
A few misinformed people on this site complain that S.M. products are overpriced compared to U.S. yet think it is fine and dandy that Ontario's wind power is way overpriced at approx. 2.5 times that of U.S. wind power. Talk about a cash cow! Little wonder U.S. wind power companies want to set up shop here in Ontario eh! Produce the unneeded overpriced electricity here then export it back to U.S. at 90% discount price and all Ont. Hydro customers get to subsidize U.S. Industry. I am sure Uncle Sam is smiling all the way to the bank eh! Two Ontario auditor generals plus approx. 80 municipalities have condemned wind power bully economics. The fact is we don't need the power, yet we continue to get bullied into building more.
Recommendations: 1. Price it the same as U.S. wind power and then only if we need the power.
2. Property tax should be as Industrial with no special assessment rates or subsidies
3. Do an honest cost benefit study to see if it is really needed and what the research suggests are better evolving alternatives.
I never cease to be amazed by the ignorance of and arrogance of those supply management supporters who obviously:
(A) have never been in a grocery store on either side of the Canada/US border.
(B) don't know and/or studiously avoid talking to anyone who has.
(C) can't remember their own names when posting opinions on this site.
I am also amazed to be accused, by virtue of my silence, that I somehow "think it is fine and dandy that Ontario's wind power is way overpriced...." and this sort of convoluted logic could only come from someone whose own logic processing circuitry has been fried because of a blind obedience to the 40 years of propaganda generated by supply management.
For the record, I see nothing good in any part of Ontario's Green Energy Program for almost exactly the same reasons I see nothing good about supply management.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I said "a few" not you specifically. So, don't get your knickers in a knot. Good to hear that you think wind turbines are not good for economic reasons etc. Maybe we could here it as often we here about SM.
The grinding-stupidity of, and complete lack of credibility of anonymous posters, especially the ones who support supply management, continues to baffle - for example, how can anyone tell if the above anonymous poster is, in fact, the same anonymous supply management-supporting fool who wrote the posting to which I objected in the first place?
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
grocery shopping in the US may be cheaper but there are are poorer standards. I prefer milk from here without the hormones and no I am not a dairy farmer.
(1) While BST hormones aren't allowed to be sold in Canada, there appears to be nothing to restrict their use by Canadian dairy farmers who import them for their own use, and who also appear to have no requirements to tell anyone when they use them, and how much of them they use.
(2) The last time I checked, there were no Canadian import restrictions on dairy products containing BST.
(3) in the US, BST-free milk is voluntarily labelled as such.
Because of the combination of (1) (2) and (3) above, If I wanted BST-free milk, I suggest I have a better chance of buying it in a grocery store in the US than in Canada.
The myth that Canadian dairy products are BST-free is, therefore, nothing more than supply management propaganda which, in the case of the above anonymous poster, obviously seems to be working.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Not sure why the editors of BF allow this sort of off topic deviation to go on? Not saying you can't continue this discussion but please take to another news story that is related to BST. However, as per usual Mr. Thompson is granted liberties on this site that most posters wouldn't be granted. Just because he claims this site as his sandbox and he claims he is never wrong, doesn't mean the editors should always bow to his diatribes, and name calling bully tactics. We should expect better from BetterFarming.
When somebody, especially an anonymous nobody, posts a falsehood, in this instance serving to perpetuate the myth that Canadian milk and dairy products are BST-free, EVERYONE on this site who knows better is obliged to point out the truth.
More to the point, I didn't go "off topic" but was quite-appropriately correcting factual errors in a post made by an anonymous poster who, in spite of his/her claims, could easily be a dairy farmer or an employee of the Dairy Farmers of Ontario.
That I seem to be, and seem to have been, the first to do so is incidental and irrelevant. However, whenever I do point out a falsehood, and thereby irritate those who, like dairy farmers in this instance, would benefit from those falsehoods, I derive great satisfaction from having done so.
The only liberties this site grants to anyone is the liberty to be able to anonymously post falsehoods - what the above anonymous poster doesn't seem to understand (do any of them?) is that the liberty to anonymously post falsehoods creates an equally, if not greater obligation to expose these falsehoods and the irresponsibility of the posters for what and who they are. I am granted no greater liberties on this site than anyone else, nor should I be. In addition, on those occasions when I have been factually incorrect, I do apologize for having done so, and that is, by definition, something no anonymous poster can, or ever could do.
If the Canadian dairy industry and dairy farmers on this site felt any sense of shame or public responsibility, they would be the first to jump up to point out the truth about BST in Canada, instead of conveniently:
(A) doing nothing and thereby allow erroneous public perceptions to inadvertently benefit the evil empire known as supply management.
(B) anonymously shooting the messenger of unpalatable truth.
And, sheesh, for about the thousandth time, what is it about posting anonymous falsehoods being the ultimate in bullying that the anonymous rabble on this site refuses to understand?
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Well here we go AGAIN !! You will get the old it is my purpose in life to point out blah blah blah , then it will be the whao is me and don't shot the messenger duck and run , then likely try the old anonymous does not have any right B.S. .
What is worse is the fact of this person representing at a provincial organization . Then throw in the fact of that organization being in bed with BF or vis a versa and allowing this to continue .
I remember the mayor of Ottawa sating one time . If you stop feeding the pigeons they will not stay and shit on every thing !
To claim it is a "fact" that the Ontario Federation of Agriculture is "in bed with" Better Farming, is a smear of the highest order and typical of the mind-set of, and sleazy arm-chair tactics of a low-life coward with no scruples, no dignity, no intelligence and definitely no understanding of the law.
For example, the dire lack of intelligence on the part of the above poster was made abundantly clear when he/she didn't even know enough to identify which Mayor of Ottawa purportedly made the statement attributed to him/her. It's irresponsible enough to make anonymous claims, it is even worse to cite an anonymous Mayor when doing so.
That this site seems to be overpopulated by anonymous, bottom-feeding individuals who possess not one shred of literary responsibility, is, alas, a smear against the dgnity of agriculture itself.
I publish my name because I'm not afraid of being sued or harrassed by people who might accost me on the street. And instead of being harrassed, I am constantly thanked, both on-line and in-person, for constantly taking the faceless and thin-skinned rabble on this site to considerable task, as well as for constantly exposing the sleazy, the duplicitous and the conniving side of supply management.
You're welcome!
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Do as everyone else is doing,ignore him.He has even taken to reponding to 3-year old posts just to fill his anti-SM quota.Soon he will be commenting on his comments!
..but l agree,Better Farming has become the CBC of Agricultural forums when it comes to following their own Guidelines,my only theory is negativity sells,thoughtful Positive posts do not.
It is not the why but the how that turns so many off .
It would be different if he would turn off the personal "cheap thrills" and enjoyment but certain things turn peoples cranks .
If he was credible he would post things like http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=913079
Sighhhh
Yes, that news showed up also on the Financial Post the same day.
I pointed out the flaw in the governments hypocrisy, and was of course voted to the top in the comment section.
http://business.financialpost.com/2014/12/09/ottawa-to-unveil-new-law-to...
Raube Beuerman
Shortly after the announcement of this proposed legislation, I saw an interview with Perrin Beatty, long-time federal Cabinet Minister and currently the CEO of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, wherein Beatty was commenting about this proposed legislation, and, to nobody's surprise, but to the continued disappointment of supply management supporters who simply can't face the truth, Beatty commented along the lines that one of the perpetual and substantial offenders in the Canada/US retail price imbalance was supply management.
I mean, really, if someone with Beatty's qualifications, his experience, and his current position doesn't understand the unending perfidities of supply management, who does?
Yet, still supply management supporters still adamantly refuse to face the truth - Canadians don't go to the US for any foods other than dairy and poultry products simply because the cross-border retail price differential for non-dairy and non-poultry products doesn't make the trip to the US worthwhile.
Mr. Beatty and Mr. Beuerman were both quite-correct to point out the continuing hypocrisy on the part of government when it comes to one of the most-blatant examples of cross-border retail price differentials caused by the legislation underpinning supply management.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
I'm not sure how this comment relates to this article, I don't see anything in the article about supply management. editors when someone goes totally off topic like this why is his comment printed? I really think the editors should answer this question. It does nothing for good dialogue.
Agreed the comment does not relate to the story . The new Price Transparency Act makes not one mention of any thing related to food and maybe it should . It only goes into consumer goods that are bought online or travelled to the USA . I am not sure food even matters . Are we allowed to even bring food home from south of the border ? Really seems that there is a set of blinders already being used with regards to what this act will even be put to use for .
Then why didn't Beatty do something about Supply management when he was actually in a position to do so.Why didn't Brian Mulroney or Martha Hall Findlay speak up against SM when they were in power? Instead of whining about it after their PM and MP days were over.
Simply because Supply Management has worked well for over 40 years.There has never been a consumer demand for change,if fact survey after survey suggests Canadians favor a home-grown product now more than ever and there has never been the Political desire of any Party to tinker with SM.
Mr.Beatty,like so many others now look at SM as something to be traded away for a bag of marbles.I guess they fell safe saying that now that they are out of power.
Sadly your effort to bring SM to the forefront seems to of fallen off the radar . I could only find three or four SM comments . Not sure if people don't know , don't care or just don't think about food . Likely it is more that people buy what they want first then what ever money is left over gets spent on food . Really telling of how un important food is to the general public here in Canada .
I suspect that you are a host for wind turbines or would like to be - if not I suggest you educate yourself as to the realities of this so called renewable energy and the
sorry state of Ontario's power grid. Once you do this you will learn
Comment modified by editor
MY FRIEND I JUST BOUGHT 82 AC OF PRIMELAND ,WOULD LOVE TO COVER IT WITH SOLAR ,WIND AND WATER IF I HAD ALL THREE ! BUT WE WILL APPLY FOR SOLAR AND WIND CONTRACTS AS SOON AS THEY BECOME AVAILABLE ! YOU FARMERS BEHAVE LIKE ALL SUPPLY MANAGEMENT ONE ,NOT IN MY BACK YARD !! YOU FARMERS ALL LIKE THE FREE TAX PAYERS MONEY YOU ALL GET !! MILLIONS OF FREE TAX PAYERS MONEY ,FARMER'S PAY NOTHING ON LAND TAXES COMPARED TO URBAN PEOPLE ! THIS RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAM IS TO HELP URBAN PEOPLES HYDRO BILL'S IN THE FUTURE !! IT SEEMS THAT URBAN PEOLE PAY FOR EVERYTHING ,FARMERS NOTHING !! FREE RIDE ON THE BACK'S OF URBAN TAX PAYERS !! THAT IS THE FACTS ,FARMERS SUCK IT UP !! GREEN IS HERE TO STAY ,NO MATTER WHAT GOVERNMENT IS IN POWER !! BILL DENBY ,IMPORTER /EXPORTER
YOU KNOW THE MORE I READ YOUR SILLY COMMENT ,THE MORE I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK CLOSER INTO WHAT FARMERS ARE DOING ON THERE FARMS !! WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE SICK TODAY THEN EVER ,FARMERS ARE GROWING GMO'S THAT ARE KILLING PEOPLE ,USING CHEMICALS THAT SHOULD NOT EVEN BE USED ON CROPS !! THIS IS MODERN FARMING TO DAY ,ALL ABOUT THE PROFITS ,BUYING MORE HIGH PRICED LAND ,PAYING $ 200.00 TO $ 300.00 AN AC. TO RENT ,POSIONING THE SOIL ,WATER AND THE AIR WE ALL NEED !! THESE PEOPLE THINK RENEWABLE ENERGY IS A HEALTH RISK TO THEM ,WELL MAYBE ,WE THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY HAD BETTER START MAKING FARMERS LIABLE FOR KILLING PEOPLE WITH THERE CROPS THEY GROW AND SELL !! THAT INCLUDES ALL MODERN FOOD PRODUCTION PACTICES FOR MILK ,CHICKEN ,TURKEY ,BEEF ,PORK ,GRAINS ,ETC. WE THE CONSUMING PUBLIC HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT YOU PEOPLE ARE DOING TO OUR FOOD !! WE ALL NEED TO START NOW BEFORE THE MODERN FARMER KILLS US ALL ,WITH THERE NEW FARMING PRACTICES !! WOULD YOU LIKE TO DEBATE THIS BOYS IN PUBLIC ??????????? BILL DENBY .IMPORTER /EXPORTER
It should read, the Project will provide "intermittent" power needs for 100,000 homes.
Exactly on which side of the border those homes will be is not stated.
Ontario taxpayers are paying a lot of money to look green.
It will be watching with interest to see how much money is directed into Ontario's new Green Bonds, from the also new and coming ORPP.
Will those numbers become public?
Raube Beuerman
'I' will....
Raube Beuerman
This story doesn't mention that the farm just to the east of the Drennan farm on Halls Hill Line in the former Township of Ashfield, is being turned into a huge transformer station, complete with 24-hour security guards and ponds for whatever these projects need ponds for.
It's been an adventure (some would claim nightmare) to just drive along that road for the better part of 2014 because of the construction of the transformer station.
The Drennan family, therefore, would appear to face double-jeopardy by having to accept both the towers and the presence of a transformer station as part of their way of life - "disappointment" would be, I suggest, vastly understating the case.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
One of the biggest problems is that these decisions to build and allow these things to be built are made in Toronto or Queens Park with out an regard for those who have to live among the construction , aftermath and with the problems that will be forth coming .
These companies come blowing through like a hurricane with no regard for nature , the locals or any thing at all for that fact . They have a free pass from Gov and that is all that matters .
The workers drive like fools , have no regard for farmers and the sharing of the road while others drive slow down the middle of the road and encourage road rage from some one trying to get some where . The fact of the economics not making sense just adds insult to injury all the while there are funds likely being passed under the table at QP !
You left out the boneheaded economics of the overpriced contracts plus the extra grid upgrades and switching-buffer stations as pointed out by two auditor general reports. All for power "we do not need" ..now or in the foreseeable future! All for power that is not dependable when you actually need it, and all for power that often needs to be exported at a loss etc. which all electric users have to come good for. And yet we continue to build more.
The bone-headed economics of overpriced wind contracts is identical to the bone-headed economics of artificially-high farm gate prices for dairy and poultry products.
In addition, forcing energy consumers to finance over-priced domestic energy production is as bone-headed as forcing food consumers to finance over-priced domestic food production.
Furthermore, over-priced energy and food both cause a transfer of wealth and jobs to jurisdictions which avoid the folly of trying to emulate our type of collective stupidity.
Basically, whatever people don't like about Ontario's wind energy program applies in equal measure to supply management.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
If not from renewable energy, where are we to get our electricity needs from in the future? I would much rather see money being pumped into solar and wind power than into nuclear or coal (luckily coal is gone in Ontario now). Ontario currently generates the majority of its electricity needs from nuclear. Nuclear energy produces radioactive waste that has a half life in the thousands of years! And Ontario is looking at burring it deep underground not too far from Lake Huron or any of the other great lakes for that matter. Even if there is not an accident for a few hundred years the result of contamination would be devastating! Nuclear power plants also have massive construction costs that we the consumers pay for and they last a little longer than solar panels or wind turbines before they need to be refurbished, which also costs a lot. I agree that the wind turbines (or the green energy act) do not seem economical right now, but as technology advances renewable energy could play a much greater and more important role in Ontario's electricity production. We will be lucky in 20, 30 or 50 years from now when the infrastructure is already in place for wind turbines. My hopes are that renewable energy technology continues to advance to produce significantly more energy per panel/turbine, and Ontario can slowly move away from producing radioactive waste from Nuclear power plants.
It appears that the role of farmers could shift from pure food producers to food and electricity producers, which I think is great. Have an open mind, think about the future and don't be afraid of change! I live about 500m from an industrial size turbine and haven't had any problems.
A.H.
Green energy is not as "green" as many want all to believe . There just might be a real good reason to hit the pause button on all the green and let technology catch up .
As for farmers having a role , I suggest that you start getting a calorie count done of the turbine you are planning on eating ! Hope you have good theeth and a dental plan !!
To suggest that wind power is without sin is simply bogus (even without the subsidies). As with so many government flavour of the day solutions, wind energy is not based on the latest science. The simple fact is when the wind doesn't blow as it did this afternoon and evening there is limited wind power. Then, when the wind does blow, the IESO shuts down reliable renewable water generation. Now that makes a lot sense eh! Bottom line is we don't need wind power even without coal.
The fact is there are newer, safer, more fuel efficient emerging nuclear generators that could be used to reuse our current supply of spent fuel sources. Please read: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/12/10/the-unsinkable-german-anti-co2-tit...
Was just talking to some one earlier today who said their solar panel was not putting out any power today . The wind turbines in my area are not turning today either . So the question now is how do you charge you electric car with green unreliable energy when you need to get to work , a doctors appointment , get groceries or run the children to their sports events ??
I guess we might as well start eating them if they are so green !
As much as we question change when it comes along it always does happen. Solar power is definitely here to stay, luv it or hate it. Samsung is currently signing up farm land for large projects in 3 years. The deals they are offering the land owners are too good to pass up. They will make as much from the land leases as they would farming the land. We hate to see acreage that has always been growing crops turned into a parking lot for solar panels but I guess we have to accept it. Change is the one thing we can be certain of in life.
I'll admit, I was drawn into the socialist world of green energy back when the first microfit program was introduced and it's not something I am proud of.
Since that time, I have educated myself, part of that included stumbling onto this website and learning from Mr. Thompson.
The other education came from reading investment books and websites and also becoming a fan of Kevin O'Leary.
I had the option of staying in the microfit program but opted out.
The fellow I last dealt with was surprised with my decision(since all the others stayed in), I told him I didn't like the idea of taking from taxpayers and ratepayers, and besides, the return of 8%....... I can get from the market......without government involvement.
Raube Beuerman
The green energy program is a make work project, it's as simple as that! None of the wind or solar systems that I have been involved with since 2004 have produced any proposal of profit when the installation, maintenance, repair and disposal costs are considered using the, "FACTS". The bottom line shows black only after the taxpayer funding, for initial installation only, is factored in. Only with tax dollars would any businessman or woman attempt such an open-ended folly. Mining or green energy, choose your neighbour!
Stan Thayer, CET, Dunvegan Ont.
Post new comment