Just recently I was advised to exercise caution in repeating Hansard quotes (Ontario parliamentary minutes) which raise suggestions that a person is or may be corrupt. This professional person who represents my industry suggested that I was wandering into a legal minefield. He also suggested that this person was exemplary and deserved my respect. RESPECT!
Does this person deserve my respect when his company disseminates contracts which insists on first rights of refusal of my land to his company, when I come to sell my property or that I must postpone ones mortgage to his company?
How is it that one deserves respect when I asked for the dozen & 1/2 suggestions that my industry organization recommended to include in my contract and was refused because these were too restrictive or unrealistic?
How is it that he deserves respect when I asked for indemnification from land values falling, for my own property and that of my neighbours and I am rebutted by his employee saying that “this company doesn’t ask for kick backs when my land values go up”. Is not their interest the wind and the panacea of an idea that wind is our saviour for this province’s energy needs and C02 emissions? Therefore why would they be interested in my land values?
How is it a company headed by this person, can misrepresent his wind project in my area by piece mealing 24 turbines into 4 groups of 6 in order to qualify for a program funded by taxpayer dollars at the higher rate? Soon after the awarding of this 11 cent/KWh contract, the OPA announces that this kind of piece mealing will no longer be accepted, yet this person can proceed under this agreement. I guess it has nothing to do with his work on an advisory board that helped develop this Standard Offer Program.
How is it that a company headed by this person ends up equating an Environmental Screening Report to a Environmental Assessment despite my county’s proposed Official Plan on Renewables stipulating that this is a requirement for his project located in a more sensitive mgt area only 1 to 3 km away from an Important Bird Area and provincially significant wetlands.
How is it that this person and his company are allowed to locate his turbines on some of Canada’s best prime agricultural land without even having my industry organization (an organization which I thought was in place to protect farmland as well as the interests of all its members) flinch an eye at the thought that these parcels are being chewed up with roadways. All because according to the company’s assessment there is minimal impact.
Through my organization’s lack of concern over this kind of land use and promotion of wind energy, a dangerous precedents has been established, where this province is essentially promoting the industrialization of agricultural land. All in the face of my county’s efforts to indicate to wind developers, that there are more suitable lands elsewhere. Instead this person continues to push through the back door and proceeded to sign up unsuspecting growers, before the county had time to establish their policies on renewables. This person’s company was then allowed to proceed with a rezoning amendment that was passed within minutes after a majority of residents presented against this rezoning.
How is it that developers like this person is allowed to inflict suffering on the people of Ripley, Goderich, and Kincardine with stray voltage and noise levels which cause health problem and are not legally obligated to do anything because they, on paper, meet the regulatory requirements set out by this province. I suspect we don’t hear these people speak out for fear that the company who is doing “something” will leave them in a lurch
I have asked over and over again for caution with regards to industrial wind development with my council and have in return received accusations of NIMBYism and disseminating anti-wind propaganda. I’ve spent the last two years visiting other wind sites and researching wind energy. In examining the information and talking to people who are affected by wind development, it truly puts into question the value of what this person is doing especially when his industry can only, at best, provide 4% of this province’s energy needs and that is after plastering the country side with wind turbines and subsidizing through taxpayer dollars for 20 years.
Only 25% of Ontario energy needs are being met by fossil fuel generators ( the opposite exists in Europe (75% from fossil fuels). – and not one coal generating plant in the world has been replaced by any wind nor will be because of it’s intermittent nature. In fact Germany is constructing 26 new coal generating plants and Canada is still looking at coal generation for the future. Have a look below:
Coal power to remain important part of Canada’s supply
The federal regulatory agency said in its briefing note, titled “Coal-Fired Power Generation: A Perspective,” that coal-fired generation will decline; however, it expects that an estimated 10,000 MW of capacity will be installed by 2030.
Canada’s coal reserves are roughly equivalent to its oil reserves, and coal-fired generation represents more than 16,200 MW, or 13%, of the nation’s installed power generation. In 2006, about 16% of the country’s electricity (mostly in Alberta and Ontario) was generated from coal. Coal-fired generation is nonexistent in provinces such as British Columbia and Quebec that rely on hydroelectric resources.
Uncertainty about the direction of the future greenhouse gas regulations and the cost and reliability of newly developed clean-coal technologies will impact the consideration of coal-fired generation as a practical investment and limit the opportunity for increased coal-fired generation, the agency said.
The energy brief provides a rundown of the nation’s latest technological developments concerning coal-fired generation. Concerning integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC), the NEB said that at present, the levelized unit cost of power generation is estimated at 15% to 20% higher than the next-best, supercritical coal-fired technology.
“If sufficient experience is gained, either from plants in other countries or pilot projects in Canada, IGCC has the potential to become the preferred technology for generating electricity from coal,” it said.
Likewise, if carbon sequestration and storage proves practical, it would address a major concern about coal-fired generation and tend to promote the construction of new coal-fired power plants and associated CO2 pipelines, the agency suggested.
As you know Hydro and Nuclear form the majority of this provinces energy needs. Seems to me that the largest portion of Ontario’s electrical energy consumption is already emission free.
So you see it is about RESPECT, but it means for all involved including this rural grubby.