Anti-turbine activist stands firm

© AgMedia Inc.

An appeal of a Chatham-Kent wind power development continues despite this week’s defeat of efforts elsewhere in Ontario to overturn a provincial law governing distances between wind turbines and dwellings


Yes, the court simply passed the 550 setback health and safety buck to the hearing in Chatham.
In fairness however, the court needs to also be given credit for agreeing that the governments “process” of taking away municipal rights to have a say was followed correctly and that the consultation “process” of consulting on the GEA which generated and then ignored several thousands of objections was also followed to the “t”!
ACW and Huron Kinloss have both recently passed bylaws stating 1000 meter setbacks from all residences in their municipalities. This would mean all turbines should be placed at the very back of each 1000m x 400m 100 ac. farm, where they should have been put in the very beginning allowing roads at the very bck of each farm and resulting in far less agriculture land being disrupted.
The only question remaining is if the MOE and politicians claim they are so concerned about the health and safety of rural families then why are they not mandating the 1000 meter setback? Clearly, they appear to be more concerned about turbine density and money than rural health and safety.

Post new comment

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
We welcome thoughtful comments and ideas. Comments must be on topic. Cheap shots, unsubstantiated allegations, anonymous attacks or negativity directed against people and organizations will not be published. Comments are modified or deleted at the discretion of the editors. If you wish to be identified by name, which will give your opinion far more weight and provide a far greater chance of being published, leave a telephone number so that identity can be confirmed. The number will not be published.