Suspend wind development for now: OFA

© AgMedia Inc.

Industrial wind turbine developments are pitting neighbours against neighbours and raising concerns about human health as well as the loss of farmland says the Ontario Federation of Agriculture


The baby boomer farmers of wind power will be remembered as greedy self servers

Who would want a bunch of windmills or solar power next door. Its no different than a dump or a giant Quarry. They should be where nobody has to put up with them or compensate the people who has to live next door .In most cases I bet the people who owns those big projects live nowhere around them, likely in the next county where,s there is none within miles.

Now that the OFA has raised the issue of pitting farmer against farmer, it is only logical that the OFA should go one step further and also call for a "moratorium" on supply management because it also squarely pits farmer against farmer, as well as creating "economic destruction" for everyone, including dairy farmers who now find themselves effectively unable to buy quota.

That the economic benefits of both supply management and wind turbines are shared by only a few, while the costs of both are shared by many, should give any farm organization ample reason to call for a halt to not just wind turbines, and supply management, but all legislated inconsistencies which favour only just a relatively few farmers.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

As a farmer and member of OFA, I am very pleased with the new policy OFA has created in regards to wind turbines. We also were offered a lease about 3-4 years ago by about 3 different companies. We said no. Pressure tactics were used by the wind developers. We said no even though farmers/neighbours all around us did sign up. Of course one lives in Hamilton and is an absentee land owner. What do they care?!

Do the studies McGuinty. If you are so confident wind turbines are the way to go, what are you afraid of? A literature study is not sufficient, McGuinty. For every study that says wind is OK, I can find 10 that say it ain't so. I am not a doctor and even I can figure that one out.

And when you pay a consulting outfit Dalton, make sure they use recent data. I find it interesting that a recent study released (Dec. 2011) by Howe Gastmeier Chapnick Limited concluded that Ontario’s regulations on wind turbine noise limit - a 550 metre minimum setback at 40 decibels - are one of the strictest in North America. HGC is a consulting engineering firm which was retained by the Ministry of the Environment to complete a study on setback distances. I do not agree with their conclusion. And here is why:

Wind Turbine Set Backs from residences in North America

1. 3,219 m (2 miles) to a rural home - Umatilla County, Oregon
2. 1,609 m (1 mile) buffer zone to homes – Hillsdale County, Michigan
3. 1,500 m for a 150 m turbine (10x tip height) from rural residences – Ellis County, Kansas
4. 1,219 m (4,000 ft) from occupied structures – Clifton, Maine
5. 1,000 m to habitable building - Halifax, Nova Scotia
6. 1,000 m for a GE2.5 (10x blade diameter) from residential zones – Brewster, Cape Code, Massachusetts
7. 1,000 m for a GE2.5 (10x rotor diameter) to nearest receptor or residential zoned area – Barnstable County, Massachusetts
8. 914 m (3,000 ft) from property line of nearest nonparticipating receptor – Claybanks Township, Michigan
9. 914 m (3,000 ft) from residential areas – Riverside, California
10. 853 m (2,800 ft) to closest residence – Wareham, Massachusetts
11. 805 m (1/2 mile) from nearest homes – Roanoke County, Virginia
12. 762 m (2,500 ft) from turbine base to dwelling or building – Charlton, Massachusetts
13. 750 m to residence or 2,000 m to towns – Province of Quebec
14. 750 m for a 150 m turbine (5:1 ratio) – Charlestown, Rhode Island
15. 700 m – Saskatchewan
16. 610 m (2,000 ft) + consent + compensation for loss of value – Lenawee County, Michigan
17. 610 m (2,000 ft) from homes and other buildings – Iroquois County, Illinois
18. 610 m (2,000 ft) setback to homes – Douglas Township, Illinois
19. 36 dB(A) noise limit – Shepherd Flat, Oregon
20. 35 dB(A) night time max noise – Libertyville, Illinois

I could go on and on and on and on.... This is just one example where the wind industry and government has totally mislead Ontario.

These monstrous structures and there multi generational leases will haunt our children and grandchildren. Not against them but should not be in populated or on productive farmland. Put them in the provincial parks ,maybe tourist lakes,Toronto isaland,ect.Thank you OFA for asking for a moratorium

Does anyone that can really do anything, read these comments ? I,m just wondering.

farmers' comments about the subsidizing of "warming" windmills that burn propane and diesel to warm the air so grapes growing in a marginal zone in Niagara and elsewhere don't freeze while our tax dollars go to subsidize "power-producing" windmills throughout southern Ontario so that we don't burn coal to hurt young or old for that matter, asthmatics.
I used to think politicians were smerter dan us poor voters.
This is only one of many things we pay for twice in Ontario.
There is only one answer - no bailouts, no bonuses, no subsidies, no tax-breaks!

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.