Dear editor,
It concerns this reader that the comparison between wind turbines and combines (Wind Turbines and combines share fiery traits) may be misleading. It also concerns this reader that the online article was authored by the Better Farming "staff", no doubt an expression that no single author would place her/his name with the article.
Analogies are used in an effort to express similarities. In this case, wind turbine vs. combines, the analogy is used to minimize a very clear and present danger associated with wind turbines: Fire.
The last time I checked, combines were not perched atop 400 ft towers, exposed to wind at that height or operating and unattended at that height. A wind turbine, placed in a remote area, away from busy roads poses many risks that a combine does not. Glaringly obvious is that the wind facility is, at most times, unattended. Combines (for now) have an operator, and are visited often by other occupied farm tractors with grain buggies in tow.
Using the example already played out in Goderich, a scenario that is very common, one must consider the "what ifs"? What if no one saw the fire? This is very likely. Wind turbines placed in a rural area that include homes filled with sleeping families and barns filled with sleeping livestock are the norm. The wind turbine fire near Goderich was reported at 2 a.m. One can easily surmise that fire is a very clear and present danger in this scenario. We all know that when it comes to fire fighting, time is of the essence. We are also told that fire spreads quickly. What if there was a crop ready to harvest beneath the wind turbine? Or a pasture suffering from a severe drought?
A wind turbine only operates when it is windy. Quite a statement, I know, but it brings up another concern. How far could burning debris from a wind turbine travel. We know, in the Goderich incident, debris was found 200m from the base of the turbine. There is evidence from around the world that burning fiberglass from wind turbine blades can travel much greater distances.
In the unfortunate scenario that a person may have been injured as a result of this fire, the option of using an emergency air ambulance service would also be negated. Visibility in the vicinity of a fire is generally poor due to the smoke. Add to that the cover of darkness and poorly maintained red safety beacons atop wind turbines, evidenced in the Enbridge Wind Farm in Bruce County, the option for added assistance is eliminated. Along with the increased risk of accidents and collisions given the height of the turbines, turbulence and visibility due to smoke and the known interference wind turbines produce on hampering radio reception, no professional pilot would take the risk of flying within what they deem a safe distance of a wind turbine operation, as it would be a threat to legal aviation activities.
Wind turbines, under the GEA (Green Energy Act), may be placed at a distance of the blade length plus 10m from the property of a non-participating land owner. The wind developer may also apply to have the wind turbine placed just 40m from fence lines. A noise receptor, the crudely used term described by wind developers for our homes and families, may be 550m from a wind turbine. Wind turbines may be placed closer to a home if you happen to be a participating land owner whether you rent the home to another family or not. There are no regulations in the GEA for minimum distances to livestock facilities.
As a non-participating landowner (another crude term used to describe human beings in the GEA), I have yet to be provided, in writing, that any damage caused by wind turbines will be mitigated by the wind developer. Being that many non-participating farms are within the boundaries of a wind development area the risk is very real that injury or death may occur. I can only hope that no wind developer will ever need to mitigate a death.
Patrick Jilesen
Vice-President Bruce County Federation of Agriculture
Editor's note: All web stories written by Better Farming staff are identified as such. Individual staff bylines are never used.
Comments
It would appear that a non participating landowner's fire insurance premium for a farm buildings or crops located near a participating wind turbine might suddenly have either a surcharge risk applied or might even have no coverage for turbine fires or associated blade throws. Something to think about and ask when you do your annual fire insurance coverage assessment.
Anonymous comment deleted
Farm owners with turbines and renewal energy infrastructure located on your land should check with their insurance brokers.
Do you still have coverage from any third party claims for your farm?
You now have a tenant that you have no control over to their access and activities on your land. The access roads are an invitation for unwanted visitors. These are machines that can and do malfunction, like a turbine fire.
What if your "non participating receptor" next door or down the road (who used to be known as your neighbours) sues you for nuisance, harm, loss of property value? Ask your broker. The answer I have been given if you now have a policy with exclusion clauses.
Simply stated you will find most policies will not cover you for any third party claims for any perils related to renewable energy projects that supply electricity to the grid.
(If you are covered please let us all in on who the underwriter is and the specific conditions) Time to talk to your lawyer?
I would like to thank Patrick Jileson, Vice-President of the Bruce County Federation of Agriculture for his responsible response to the article. I will be phoning my Insurance Company today to ask what my position is should an abutting wind facility wipe my farm out due to fire in the nacelle, strong winds and dry crops and the inability of our fire department to put out a fire at 500 ft!. I believe that the Fire Chiefs of rural municipalities in Ontario have the power and responsibility to not allow this hideous known risk to burden our communities. The developer should have to provide insurance to cover all non participating neighbours. No insurance in place, No permit to operate an industrial machine of such height and magnitude of such risk and danger. It behooves me that the MOE and the MNR, the Ontario Fire Chief has not considered the obvious disaster in the making to rural Ontario. Years ago forrest fires in our northern mining towns wiped out whole towns! My grandmother survived the great fire of Hailybury, New Liskard and Cobalt in 1922. Her and her siblings had to wade into Lake Timiskaming , neck deep with wetted burlap feed sacks over their heads. The fire leveled the town. When will rural Ontario secede from the Toronto mentality that insists on trashing us or wiping out our way of life. Over 90 municipalities in rural Ontario have declared that they are NOT willing hosts. Yet the giant industrial machines keep marching marching marching! A spring election is our only hope. Oust McGuinty's puppet, Premier Kathleen Wynne NOW! Melodie Burkett, Spring Creek farms, Clearview, Ont.
Post new comment