View topic - Ontario stops offshore wind power development

It is currently February 18th, 2020, 4:55 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: February 11th, 2011, 3:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 29th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 6155
Location: Bancroft, Ontario Canada
Local resistance to planned wind farms off the Scarborough Bluffs and Prince Edward County at Point Petre (next to a national wildlife refuge) may have had some effect.




Quote:
Ontario stops offshore wind power development

RICHARD BLACKWELL

Globe and Mail Update
Published Friday, Feb. 11, 2011 2:54PM EST
Last updated Friday, Feb. 11, 2011 3:18PM EST

The Ontario government has called a stop to any offshore wind power developments in the province’s portion of the Great Lakes, until further scientific study is done.

In an announcement Friday, the McGuinty government said it will not proceed with any offshore wind projects “while further research is conducted.”

While there have been no projects approved yet, a number were in the planning stages. There was controversy over some of the proposals, as some residents along the lake did not like the idea of their views being disrupted by turbines located in the lake.

“No offshore projects will proceed at this time,” the government’s statement said, and any applications for projects under the “feed-in-tariff” program that pays high prices for renewable power “will no longer be accepted.” Current applications will be suspended.

The government noted that producing power from offshore wind in freshwater lakes is early in the development stages and there are still no projects operating in North America. There is one project operating in Sweden, and a pilot projects has be proposed in Ohio, it said. “Ontario will monitor these projects and the resulting scientific knowledge. Ontario will work with our U.S. neighbours on research to ensure any future proposed projects protect the environment on both sides of the Great Lakes.

Ontario currently generates about 1,500 megawatts of power from land-based wind farms.

The province halted offshore wind projects once in the past. In 2006 it put a moratorium on any offshore development while it examined environmental issues, but it was removed early in 2008.

There are already hundreds of offshore wind farms in place in ocean waters, mainly off the coasts of European countries.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le1904138/

_________________
><((((º>


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 9:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: April 3rd, 2003, 5:35 am
Posts: 1531
Location: NORTHERN ONTARIO
I don't understand how it is "local residents" who always seem to be responsible for halting so many projects of any kind (wind, low-income housing etc)? I some how suspect that there are other pressures involved that the gov't's don't want to admit to, and subsequently as soon as a "local resident" baks then wammo, "stop, everyone out, out of the pool" then easily blame them.

But if it really IS the "local residents" then I still don't understand their clout, and really what grounds do they have? The "view"? Seriously? Did their mortgage agreement include a fee for "the view"? Granted they probably paid a premium, but that doesn't encompass a 360' "as far as the eye can see" expanse!

Gimme a break!

_________________
"That's all I have to say about that..." (Forest Gump)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 9:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: June 11th, 2005, 11:19 am
Posts: 1870
Location: Boise, ID
Perhaps. But many polls indicate NIMBYism really isn't that big a factor with wind development (unless you try and put a wind farm directly opposite a large estate of some prominent Senator or Member of Parliament). Here and Here. I would tend to look at other factors for the slowdown. Ontario has recently added a great deal of energy from variable sources through FIT. It's probably wise to work on integrating these sources, rather than rushing headlong into adding new capacity (when it may not be needed). So further study makes sense. The US also recently announced a national offshore wind strategy: marking off leasing blocks (previously on land slated for oil development), and some modest funding ($50 million over five years). A partnership with Northrop Grumman and Gamesa (a wind developer in Spain) may also show some benefits here. DOE has set a target of 10 GW of offshore wind by 2020, and feels it can deliver this energy at 10 cents/kWh (and 7 cents over long run). Pretty exceptional if they can pull it off. So perhaps more reason to wait, Northrop Grumman has a great deal of engineering expertise working in tough marine environments. And then there are political concerns, penny pinching (austerity), and global recession and tight credit (which doesn't impact Canada as much, but maybe it's partners). We'll see, but looks like McGuinty may be willing to let others do the heavy lifting for now, and jump in when prospects improve in the near term (and they can produce some firm numbers and reports).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 11:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 29th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 6155
Location: Bancroft, Ontario Canada
Quote:
But if it really IS the "local residents" then I still don't understand their clout, and really what grounds do they have? The "view"? Seriously?


In politics, visibility is everything and with an October 2011 election coming up, McGuinty may be feeling a little shaky. I haven't been reading the polls but the PCs may be ahead in popularity at this time.

It may be that the offshore windmills are creating a lot of bad feeling in Scarborough and there's the need to save votes in Ontario's largest city, along with the fact that Lake Ontario Waterkeeper has stated that there are better places to develop wind power. I can tell you that the view from the bluffs is spectacular on a clear day and I wouldn't want to see windmills rotating out there.

Same deal for the Prince Edward County windmills... they were planned near a bird sanctuary and there have been some pretty vociferous objections for some time now, with PEC having a tourist economy in part because of the area scenery.

The natural gas plant in Mississauga was cancelled because of local resistance so why not the windmills?

_________________
><((((º>


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 1:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: August 8th, 2003, 9:18 am
Posts: 1030
Location: KW
Hmmmm?......I smell an election.

Bullshit season is just around the corner.......................

_________________
Save Temagami
http://www.friendsoftemagami.org/

http://misabiadventurecompany.ca/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 12th, 2011, 2:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: December 19th, 2010, 3:28 pm
Posts: 41
The government shouldn't be involved in the development of alternative forms of energy in the first place. By the time things like wind power, solar power and the like actually become economically viable, all these investments that the government is making will end up being a big fat waste of money.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 2:08 am 
Offline

Joined: February 8th, 2005, 10:34 pm
Posts: 726
SWIFT wrote:
I don't understand how it is "local residents" who always seem to be responsible for halting so many projects of any kind (wind, low-income housing etc)? . . .

But if it really IS the "local residents" then I still don't understand their clout, and really what grounds do they have? The "view"? Seriously? Did their mortgage agreement include a fee for "the view"? Granted they probably paid a premium, but that doesn't encompass a 360' "as far as the eye can see" expanse!

Gimme a break!


The view is part of what you pay for. It doesn't have to be spelled out in the title deed. Same with the right to be free of low frequency noise and vibration, and all the other known or alleged problems with industrial wind turbine developments.

As to why the McGuinty government changed its collective little mind, maybe it has something to do with respecting citizens, or at least giving that impression until after the next election.

How many Russians ended up dead or slaving in forced labour camps in Siberia because they objected to having their farms collectivized? NIMBYism and government response to it.

Premier McGuinty tried that a couple of years ago. Local people and their local governments don't like having industrial wind developments forced on them? Tough. Ram it down their throats anyway. Fortunately for us humble citizens, elections have to be won now and then. So the developments are being stalled, if not actually cancelled.

By the way, who pays the fees that will inevitably be demanded by the promoters of these developments when they don't get built and the promoters don't get their outrageous subsidies? I doubt if it will be the Liberal Party of Ontario. Are we going to see surcharges on our electricity bills just like we do for paying off the mountain of debt built up by the former Ontario Hydro?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 12:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 29th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 6155
Location: Bancroft, Ontario Canada
...the answer my friend...

Image

...is blowin' in the wind... the answer is...

_________________
><((((º>


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 1:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: August 11th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 5563
Location: Sunny Wasaga Beach
The NIMBYs have won yet again!! :evil:

_________________

Old canoeists never die---they just smell that way.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 14th, 2011, 9:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: February 8th, 2005, 10:34 pm
Posts: 726
wotrock wrote:
The NIMBYs have won yet again!! :evil:


Yeah. NIMBYs. People protecting their own rights and their own environment.

Maybe we should find something to slam into into your backyard that would ruin it for you so you understand.

A superhighway so you have to live with the noise and air pollution? A high voltage transmission line so you have to live with the electromagnetic fields? An industrial scale pig farm so you have to live with the smell in your nose and the sewage getting into your water system?

How about all those Canadian and American NIMBYs in the St Lawrence lowlands who lost their homes and farms and businesses to a canal system that is no longer economically viable, or sixty years later all the Chinese NIMBYs who lost their homes to Three Gorges? How about the aboriginal Canadian NIMBYs who lost their lands to power developments in northwestern Quebec?

How much does it take to make elitist anti NIMBYs understand?

Probably a lot. They're not the sharpest knives in the drawer.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 15th, 2011, 11:19 am 
Offline

Joined: February 20th, 2008, 6:05 pm
Posts: 494
There is the majority of Ontario residents who can't afford the view (the view is what you pay for) that might have a different opinion on who is the elitist. Unfortunately the view is probably an inherent evil of any wind power proposal.

So without being rude lp, what is the answer? If turbines can't be located where the wind is most prevelent, what then? Dam more rivers? Burn more coal?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 15th, 2011, 12:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 29th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 6155
Location: Bancroft, Ontario Canada
JF,

I am not answering for LP... objecting to the offshore windmills isn't elitist, IMO. There is plenty of public access and the views are enjoyed by far more than the lakeside property owners.

There's a place to park at the Guild Inn - immediately east of the parking lot there's a ravine with a road going down to the lake. The walk along the beach east towards Highland Creek is all public-accessible. In Toronto, it's a relatively natural place - there aren't many of those left along the lake.

_________________
><((((º>


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 15th, 2011, 12:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: February 20th, 2008, 6:05 pm
Posts: 494
I happen to agree with you FT - objecting isn't being elitist. I just don't think an anti NIMBY should be categorized an elitist either. I was trying to point out that the choice of the word was questionable to start with. Regardless, no matter where these turbines are proposed (a farm field, a mountain top, or a lake shore) you are impacting somebody's little piece of heaven. Are the Norwesters in Thunder Bay any less beautiful? Or the corn fields outside of Forest? So what is the answer? Either there are going to be more wind turbines installed or not. If not, because of viewscape and other factors, what are the alternatives that you can live with? Expanded hydro facilities, coal, what?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 15th, 2011, 3:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: February 8th, 2005, 10:34 pm
Posts: 726
JF wrote:
. . . no matter where these turbines are proposed (a farm field, a mountain top, or a lake shore) you are impacting somebody's little piece of heaven. Are the Norwesters in Thunder Bay any less beautiful? Or the corn fields outside of Forest? So what is the answer? Either there are going to be more wind turbines installed or not. If not, because of viewscape and other factors, what are the alternatives that you can live with? Expanded hydro facilities, coal, what?


That is exactly the problem.

There is a way forward. Learn from the mistakes of others. Elsewhere in this forum, there have been references to more than twenty years of European experience. Apparently not a single coal-fired or nuclear plant has ever been decommissioned because of industrial wind power developments. So why wreck anyone's local environment forcing something that doesn't actually solve any problems?

The solution? Use less power.

Take a look at the light pollution around any city anywhere. Turn off the lights when you leave the house. Turn off the lights in suburban shopping malls and downtown office towers after the close of business hours. Does anyone actually need air conditioning? If we did, the human race would have died out long ago.

Conservation. It's never actually been tried. And it's long past time that we did.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: February 15th, 2011, 3:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: June 11th, 2003, 5:10 pm
Posts: 178
Location: Horseshoe Valley, On
jf

It wasn't lost patrol who started tossing around the NIMBY word. There are lots more reasons than the view not to put wind farms up just anywhere. In a word they have health effects on humans and animals, but the main thing is THEY JUST DON'T PRODUCE ENUF TO BE WORTH IT unless they can be put up without subsidization.

So yes, Build nuclear. put scrubbers on your coal plants and build natural gas plants while you continue to work on the technology. Maybe someday wind would work, but many European countries have proven that it is not there yet.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group