All County, All the Time Since 2010 MAKE THIS YOUR PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY HOME...PAGE!  Monday, August 8th, 2022

Turbine decision reaffirms respectful processes in place

A key aspect of the Ontario Divisional Court decision that has not received much attention in media reports is how the Renewable Energy Approval (REA) issued by the Ministry of Environment did, in fact, take careful account of protected animal species and plants.

The REA relied on rigorous scientific evidence that the proposed Ostrander Point wind project would produce no serious and irreversible harm to people, plants and animals. The Divisional Court also cites inconsistences in the Tribunal decision to revoke the Environment Ministry’s REA; chiefly that the Tribunal failed to give due consideration to environmental protection conditions that had been met by the developer including an Endangered Species Act (ESA) permit and an environmental management plan that has provisions for Ministry of Natural Resources oversight.

It also is important to note that the Divisional Court upheld the Tribunal’s denial of the appeals of groups opposed to the project. The Court agreed the Tribunal had determined that opposition groups had not presented solid evidence of irreversible harm to human and habitat health.

The Court’s decision reaffirms that processes are in place to ensure that wind energy projects are developed in a manner respectful of the environment and human health. This is good news for communities across Ontario who are realizing both economic and environmental benefits from wind energy development.

Robert Hornung, President
Canadian Wind Energy Association
Ottawa, Ontario

Filed Under: Letters and OpinionNews from Everywhere Else

About the Author:

RSSComments (60)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. Olmanonthemtn says:

    right on Doris! lets not forget the conservation authorities who are responsible for inland shorelines and watercourses.

  2. Doris Lane says:

    I think you are right about another method to block Gilead
    I was living in an area where sky Power was going to put a turbine behind my house and then the DND stepped and stopped the development, it was too close to airports.
    I wrote the DND about Ostrander Point and how it night effect the search and rescue helicopters.
    I wrote the Canada Steamship Line as the turbines would be close to the shipping lanes. I also got in touch with the water keeper–once they dig for the turbine they will disturb water table and pollution from trucks and their contents will pollute the water in the lake.
    Maybe more people need to write to these people.

  3. Jim McMillan says:

    Toronto. Star Mar. 3

    Hudak’s Energy policy would block renewables.

    Is this true?
    Do you really think a Conservative govt in On would do this.
    A cost of 20 billion is suggested.

  4. Mark says:

    Would any of the lands to be built on be prime agriculture?

  5. Dayton Johnson says:

    Down the line I read “County Boy”and Doris’s comments and to me both made a lot of sense but yet no one followed up on it.Instead of a pi$$ing contest amongst a few on here(you know who you are)perhaps some plan should be in the works as to how to proceed with another option instead of argueing about unions and government. Really,isn’t that water under the bridge? We are looking at a start date in 4-5 months!
    I’m thinking we need a more direct approach, non-violent that will blockade the build plan.
    Crazy idea…and I’m grasping here…so please tell me otherwise… Understanding the minimum distance(500m?) from a residence could a building be erected on private land now within that measure to counteract the turbine build? Even One would take things back to the drawing board.

  6. BH says:

    Conflict of interest?

    Sounds like a conflict of interest to me:

    “The OPSEU Pension Trust was established to give plan members and the Government of Ontario an equal voice in the administration of the OPSEU Pension Plan through joint trusteeship. As sponsors, the Government of Ontario and the Ontario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU) each appoint five Trustees to the OPTrust Board.One Government appointee and one OPSEU appointee fill the positions of Chair and Vice-Chair, with the roles alternating between Government and OPSEU appointees every two years.”

    http://www.optrust.com/aboutoptrust/Board-of-Trustees.asp

  7. Myrna Wood says:

    Ron you say “As far as the Blandings turtle ruling is concerned, this initial decision was made with no credible evidence of harm presented by the Field Naturalists or anyone else.”
    Funny, I didn’t see you at the appeal hearing listening to the evidence. As usual.
    If your concern is for sustainability of our ecosystem then you should be supporting the preservation of our biodiversity which includes our South Shore.
    If and when we need new sources of power build them on brownfields – that would be sustainable.

  8. Wolf Braun says:

    “I said I believe the purpose of political parties is to retain or gain power.”

    None of which speaks to Canadians needs. Your post suggests that you’ve resigned yourself that not much will ever change. No wonder we get what we get from our elected officials and bureaucrats.

  9. Mark says:

    Wolf, I am not much interested in your purpose and principle crusade. I said I believe the purpose of political parties is to retain or gain power. Their principles change to suit their needs in keeping with that purpose. I have little if any trust in political parties to act in the best interest of citizens as opposed to acting in what serves their own interest best at any given time. That is my take and I have nothing more to add on the subject. I hope this helps.

  10. Bruce Dowdell says:

    Russell May, you are right. We should focus on “the big picture”. So why on earth would you put a bunch of IWTs in a very sensitive wildlife area like the South Shore of The County and Amherst Island. The effect of these turbines on Climate Change will be miniscule but the effect on the environment will be horrendous.

  11. Wolf Braun says:

    “I don’t think the OPSEU investment is a conflict as they are all non management employees, not decision makers. The decision makers fall under AMAPCEO and the Ontario Pension Board.”

    You’re probably right.

    But it does speak volumes to what PRINCIPLES, or lack of, being used by both OPSEU and it’s pension board. But of course you still never replied to PURPOSE and PRINCIPLES.

  12. Mark says:

    That action would be civil disobedience and the windies will run with it as a perceived threat!Lol.

    I don’t think the OPSEU investment is a conflict as they are all non management employees, not decision makers. The decision makers fall under AMAPCEO and the Ontario Pension Board.

  13. Wolf Braun says:

    “Those dollars will flow to Gilead and to those financially backing it, which include a unit of the pension fund of OPSEU, the union to which Ontario government employees belong, including those in the Ministries involved in one way or another with the entire travesty.”

    Looks like a conflict of interest Garth. 🙁

    A busload of residents opposed to the GEA and wind turbines should gather some evening with flashlights in front of the Premier’s home and shine a light on things for her.

  14. David Norman says:

    …and bye the bye Ron, the “absence of scientific” evidence in relation to the court of law rulings regarding challenges to Industrial Wind Turbine development is a forgone conclusion based on the “null hypothesis”. In other words we cannot reject the hypothesis that court of law rulings will not favor Industrial Wind Turbine development where there is an absence of scientific evidence to suggest otherwise. You’ve extended Mike Barnard’s latest clever diatribe a little too far in this respect.

  15. David Norman says:

    Ron Hart, your comment; “Replacing fossil fuels with renewables is a legitimate strategy to help mitigate the effects of climate change. It is irresponsible to expect courts (or responsible politicians for that matter) to act contrary to repeated findings of science, especially when dealing with the number one threat to humanity, climate change.” is so naive and such disingenuous rhetoric that it’s actually hard for me to accept that even you would espouse such nonscience (oops, nonsense).
    But speaking of “climate change”, Donna Laframboise at http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/ reports that climate warmest “Woodrow (Woody) W. Clark II is going to be the keynote speaker at an upcoming Toronto ‘green’ trade show called All-Energy 2014. Last week, organizers issued a press release (distributed by the Ontario Sustainable Energy Association) describing him as a Nobel Peace Prize winner”. He is apparently making claim to being a “full-blown Nobel laureate” based on a very minor contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)… just like Michael Mann did and was chastised for this transgression by the Nobel committee itself. Now how could I possibly deny the “hockey stick” science which has been thoroughly refuted and on which Industrial Wind Turbine development is premised, when both of these scientists espouse such aggrandized false credential?
    Incidentally, I also noted that the only exhibitor in the Wind Energy section of this green energy trade show is a “Polling company” (rotfl). I can’t imagine any of the Wind companies making such a public presence.

  16. Russell May says:

    Sorry, Canada, but you need to collectively “pull your heads in!” If you do not stop Global Warming, the implications against all wildlife, and not just your Turtles, may be catastrophic.
    If you really want to keep Canada pristine, you need to do more about the integration of Renewable power and stop the reliance Fossil Fuels.
    Focus on the big picture! Climate change might be measured in decades!

  17. Olmanonthemtn says:

    Ron,the issue here is far broader, the imposition of wind turbines, the weakening of our hospital, the eviction of fisherman are but a brief example of the disregard of the interests and perspectives of local people coupled with the scandalous misuse of public funds and mismanagement of services (eg.hydro) entrusted to our government. These are symptoms of an erosion of our democratic rights and degradation of governmental ethics and competence. Active protection of civil liberties and the detection and correction of unethical governance is a civic responsibility.

    The “cost of liberty” as was written is “perpetual vigilance.” The work of socially responsible activists, journalist and satirists from Dickens, Thomas Nast and Punch magazine to Dr. Kings’ inspiring words and leadership of peaceful, legal public demonstration illustrates such vigilance. Franklin Roosevelt wrote “The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government.” I am sure in saying this he would never condone unlawful practices by the people to exert control as this would undermine the very principles he is referencing.

    However, the use of the instruments of public policy, regulation and legal bodies by the citizenry to maintain sovereign control in the face of government intimidation seems a public obligation. When the government subverts ethics in order to execute its own self-interested and ideological based morality and with hubris enters into activities requiring expertise beyond its own competence it must be held to account. In this case it has taken on the banner of climate change in order to appear to have taken the moral high ground and create its own legacy. It did so in haste and without consideration as to the true efficiency and effectiveness of its favoured technology and excluding the possibility of engaging its own citizenry as to how best to employ its design.

    As for those who write anonymously I would hope its not a matter of the authours hiding behind their ideas but letting their ideas speak for themselves

  18. Garth Manning says:

    The least that can be said about the article by Robert Hornung (leader of the association representing the wind factory industry) and the comment of Ron Hart (member of the County Sustainability Group)is that such “views”(as opposed to “facts”) can and should be published in a free and democratic society.
    That said, Mr. Hornung does not tell us that his association recently allied itself with Gilead Power and with the Ontario government in the recent court case at Osgoode Hall which for the moment ensures that Ostrander Point, its inhabitants and its migrants, will be violated for a minimum of 20 years at a cost to Ontario taxpayers, including those in the County, of many millions of dollars. Those dollars will flow to Gilead and to those financially backing it, which include a unit of the pension fund of OPSEU, the union to which Ontario government employees belong, including those in the Ministries involved in one way or another with the entire travesty.
    The very least we should do in reply is to get solidly behind the PEC Field Naturalists (of which I am not a member)in their attempt to have the Court of Appeal restore common sense and decency, so lacking in so many ways since the passage of the Green Energy Act.

  19. Ron Hart says:

    To suggest intimidation and/or unlawful protest is necessary to stop wind turbines could only come from someone posting anonymously.
    Anti-wind proponents have to realize that the science simply does not support their position as demonstrated by hundreds of court cases worldwide.
    As far as the Blandings turtle ruling is concerned, this initial decision was made with no credible evidence of harm presented by the Field Naturalists or anyone else. When you can buy these turtles on the internet, surely some evidence of harm should be presented in an appeal.

    Replacing fossil fuels with renewables is a legitimate strategy to help mitigate the effects of climate change. It is irresponsible to expect courts (or responsible politicians for that matter) to act contrary to repeated findings of science, especially when dealing with the number one threat to humanity, climate change.

  20. Doris Lane says:

    Yes Jim I believe they have–they have no choice

  21. Jim McMillan says:

    Have the field naturalists and Eric decided to challenge the last ruling?
    I see the deadline is Mar. 12.

  22. Wolf Braun says:

    My wife and I have supported the Field Naturalists from day one. Both financially as well as placing at minimum 3 signs at the front of our house along Hwy 33. We’ll be buying new ones once this snow is gone. The current signs have been destroyed by the snow and plows. We will continue to give money to this cause.

    In order to get the attention of the national media (CBC, CTV, Global, The Star, Globe&Mail, etc) you need the media skills to organize any meaningful protests. You also need a longer term media plan, otherwise the media will lose interest. It can be done, but it requires hard work.

    The good news is that we are getting closer and closer to a provincial election. The Premier has said she wants to listen to rural Ontario. It’s time to put her to the test. She’s either going to be deaf or dumb or both. Hopefully she will live up to the PRINCIPLES and PURPOSE of government. If ever there was a moment for people to express their dissatisfaction with the corruption of government, this is the cause to support.

  23. County Boy says:

    When viewed from a distance, the history of the environmental movement is a history of failures. The pace of destruction and industrialization, rather than being slowed or brought to an end, is in fact accelerating. It is time for people to realize that the tactics and strategies employed by mainstream environmentalism are ineffective and in order to get something done we need to look at the tactics used by successful resistance movements in the past. Writing letters, signing petitions, even bringing matters to the courts – all of these are scripted to fail because they are the modes of permissible protest defined by the system itself. If you don’t want wind turbines in the County, you will have to physically stop them from being built. If you don’t want people to work on wind turbines (which is generally the prelude to wind turbines being built), then you will need to create circumstances so that nobody wants to work on them (and that means those circumstances have to be serious enough to trump anything like financial gain, steady employment, etc.).

    These comments are simply observations about what seems likely to bring about change. I can’t speak for what any individual should do, and I’m not recommending any particular or general course of action; instead, I’m simply pointing out that, as in so many cases when trying to challenge industrial development, there comes a point where you will have to decide whether you want to actually win.

  24. BH says:

    The Prince Edward County Field Naturalists wish to appeal their recent Divisional Court loss to the Court of Appeal for Ontario.

    The developer and government is hoping the group gives up for lack of financial resources.

    PECFN needs local financial support more than ever.

    It is also important for help to come from our Municipal Government, other Non-Government Organizations and citizens living outside the County.

    Can Justice prevail? Only one way to find out.

    Mild protest perhaps is good, but outright civil disobedience should be avoided.

  25. Olmanonthemtn says:

    On a previous post I remarked that “We the People”need to collaborate and focus our intelligence, experience, skills and energy to challenge opaque irresponsible governance.
    The following were a few basic strategies that could be employed and I am sure amongst us there will be many more to deal with this democratic deficit. Encumber the government using its own laws, policies and regulatory bodies,ombudsman and courts. Publicly demand answers to questions which show to the government we are not ill-informed and naive. Challenge political parties as to how they intend to address our concerns in their platforms and hold them to account when they stray. Use the media, artistry and public demonstration and petitions to expose, challenge, deride and satirize government incompetence and unethical behaviour as well as offer support and recognition for sound,principled and RESPONSIBLE governance.

    In addition I think we need to resurrect the County independence movement as a satirical means to embarrass and shame this government and inform the T.O. electorate of how we are being abused, think of how we could employ County visual/performance artists, musicians, poets, satirists and columnists to support of our movement as well as enlist those from away who love this place.

  26. Mark says:

    Civil Disobenience is probably all that is left. The courts will not protect under a law the government has forcibly placed upon us.

    Can we rise to the challenge or do we as so often wilt and just take what is handed to us!

    I believe that is where we are at. Non violent citizen blockades is upon us.

  27. Jim McMillan says:

    Let’s face it.
    To cancel all the contracts and deals that have been made by the amateur uninformed zealots in the Liberal party will cost BILLIONS I would guess.
    They are a sandlot bunch playing in the bigs and I think they have started to realize it.
    Spent the afternoon checking out the old Jovian board which sold Ostrander Point.to Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financials ( assets under management 94 Billion.) in 2013,
    It looks like the price for Jovian was around 80 million .
    Tons of heavy hitters there and not an environmentalist among them as far as I could see.
    No wonder the Liberals throw the MNR and MOE at everyone trying to unwind their ill thought through agenda.
    Desperate times for them if the word ever starts to resonate in the cities about the Green Energy Debacle and the costs and secret deals.
    My question is.
    Is there any level of justice that will stand up for our rights in the face of the legal carpet bombing the Liberals are throwing at Ostrander Point.
    Unfortunately with the costs that we citizens would face if the whole scheme starts to fall apart Liberals would be collateral damage for a long long time.

  28. Steve Ferguson says:

    “The Court’s decision reaffirms that processes are in place to ensure that wind energy projects are developed in a manner respectful of the environment and human health. This is good news for communities across Ontario who are realizing both economic and environmental benefits from wind energy development.”

    Come on, Robert, it’s time for you to stop drinking the Cool Aid provided by your employers, to grow some spine and get real! Please explain how the residents of South Marysburgh are going to realize ‘economic benefits’ from wpd’s turbines. This question was posed to wpd’s Jason Alford: “Why is the White Pines project good for South Marysburgh?” His response: silence. Followed by telling me he’d forward the question to his head office to answer. Which they did…weeks after it was originally asked. No doubt lots of head scratching in Mississauga.

    As for ‘environmental benefits’, have a look at the video simulation now posted at http://www.southmarysburghmirror.com. Please explain how all the families – and there are a lot – located within one KM of turbine 4 will realize a better ‘environment’.

  29. County Steve says:

    Sorry Sam … saw your video, and I ain’t buying it. Asking someone who is paid to make wind power work answer the question: “Does wind power work?” I don’t think he’s going to say, “Hell, no, and I don’t know how to fix it.”
    Also, appearing on a video for wind proponents is not going to lead to probing questions. In fact, this whole thing does not say HOW it works, or even IF it works … it just says it generates power (which is true) … and does not counter the common thought that no IWT power has actually been USED in the grid. It reads like the Liberal government’s website, when I went seeking information. All you get is “It’s wonderful, it’s marvellous, aren’t we great?! Wouldn’t you just love to see us back in power?!”
    This sent me to many other sites, but if I want true facts, MOE and CANWEA are not the right sources.

  30. Pamela Stagg says:

    Expert witness Paul Catling said (in his testimony to the REA) that Gilead’s environmental assessment of the Ostrander Point site identified only 30% of the vascular plants in the globally (and provincially) imperilled alvar habitat. Nor does the company know how many endangered Blanding’s Turtles there are at Ostrander Point.

    That doesn’t sound very scientifically rigorous to me.

  31. Wolf Braun says:

    “How do we deal with a government that has taken away our democratic rights” … Doris Lane

    We take them back. How you ask?

    There’s a television commercial right now that talks about Canadians as being “too nice” as a flock of flying Canada geese are all saying (human voice over) “Sorry”. The message is that the world perceives us as being “nice’ people. Perhaps it takes more than being nice to take back our democracy.

    First Nations people fight for their rights all the time. One thing they do to get Government’s attention is ‘marching’ from Hudson’s Bay to Ottawa. Is that working for them? Probably not. But it might if enough Canadians march on Shire Hall, Queen’s Park and Parliament Hill.

    There are countless stories coming from the United States where people are now marching on Washington to fight government corruption. Here’s one from January of 2014 from BillMoyers.com …http://billmoyers.com/segment/lawrence-lessig%E2%80%99s-march-to-end-corruption/

  32. Doris Lane says:

    The last two posts are terrific but how can we stop them from destroying our County and our country. The PECFN have worked very hard and are still working but will it be enough.
    How do we deal with a government that has taken away our democratic rights
    There was a post about Odessa and I remember driving in the area and I think I remember seeing a fence and a gate about a wind farm. I was looking for something else and didn’t stop–I should go back
    If anyone knows how to stop this insanity lets hear your ideas

  33. Olmanonthemtn says:

    Mr Robert Hornung or may I call you Bob? Ok Bob we need to talk or better yet close your eyes and let’s do some imagineering. We’re on the southeastern shores of Prince Edward County, on a beautiful spring day an array of flowers are in bloom and the gentle wind picks up their sweet scent. You feel the tender warmth of the sun on your face, while you are serenaded with an aria composed by a multitude of colourful songbirds. As you look out over the shoreline above the azure waves of the lake comes an array of vividly coloured delicate butterflies.Yes Bob, butterflies symbols of spiritual transcendence and your soul feels uplifted and at peace, pure serenity. You realize why the County is considered in 2014 to be one of the top 15 destinations in the world (yes Bob in the world!) to visit by Enroute magazine.

    Now Bob imagine your bliss being interrupted by a steady drone you look about and to your woeful dismay appears a troop of menacing giants waving their arms and threatening the very life that had inspired you. As you try to avoid their menace you look out over the lake and you become more agitated by the sight of more behemoths on the islands offshore. Oh my God you exclaim and jump into your car (I hope its a hybrid) and run from this scene of horrendous desecration.

    You fly to another beautiful spot in Prince Edward County to regain your composure. Lake on the Mountain Park towers above the Bayof Quinte and the once home of our first prime minister which bespeaks to you of the rich history of this place and why the old families and newcomers are so enamored and committed to it. You overlook a magnificent vista that stretches before you almost to Kingston but to your horror appears a multitude of those dreadful leviathans littering the shore of Adolphus Reach and encroaching on the owl nesting grounds of bucolic Amherst Island. Your angst compels you to head towards those magnificent sand dunes and the tranquil waters of Sandbanks park. On the way you remark on the resemblance of the picturesque vineyards to those in Bordeaux but wait Bob you’ve taken the wrong route and you find yourself entrapped by more of those giant denizens.You panic! but relax Bob its only a nightmare, one which the folks of the County will have to live with! Do you get the picture BoB? If you don’t get lost.

  34. Al says:

    So Robert actually believes that the the process is correct….Awareness arose around the turn of the century that the human desire to hunt and kill birds and animals to extinction was going to cause us to lose not only a resource but also interfere with the natural environment to human detriment. One of those very aware that something had to be done was a pioneer in bird conservationist Jack Minor. Ever since then hundreds of organizations and governments have spent billions of dollars and millions of hours trying to reverse the loss of wild habitat , wildlife and bird populations through conservation. Just when we were seeing the fruits of such groups labour along comes GREED both in the form of Corporations and Government who seem to be bound on reversing the heroic efforts of conservation. Let us face up to the fact that WE are part of this. WE the tax payer, property owner and keepers of the future need to end the insanity by stopping this travesty from fulfilling its mandate of injustice. Ask yourself . . . why the heck do you want Wind corporations and their expensive “Green” alternative, unusable at peek need (Gas has to kick in) then paid by a government that has handled our purse like a spoiled brat to stop the blades turning to prevent over powering the grid? Or dumping the electrical power by PAYING U.S. states and other Provinces to take the overload? Needless to say that they pay no mind as to what they do to peoples lives with the lowered property values, destroyed tourism, health issues and STRESS! Devisions of communities when a few greedy people sign contracts with Wind companies who make and take the cash back to their own countries. Something is wrong here, democracy has been kicked out the window and it’s up to you and I to make this insane thing come to and end. Come on now how long will our pocket book be paying for this? Get angry . . fight back . . . stop this injustice NOW!

  35. Sam says:

    In contrast to Steve’s vacation story, here is a video of Kim Warren, VP of Operations and Chief Operating Officer of the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) with his take on grid integration of wind, solar and other power sources. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m294sS-4m0g

    What do you think? Liberal staffer just off screen making threatening gestures to force Mr. Warren to make this false statement? It is obviously impossible to adapt an antiquated system to accept a new reality in power generation that does not include combustion of fossil fuels or fissioning radioactive materials?

  36. Doris Lane says:

    Interesting conversation County Steve had WITH an engineer from Scarborough. A lot of us knew that that was the way things are. Hard to connect to grid–can’t store power–The iwt’s they are putting up now will be useless by the time they figure out how to use the technologies
    WHAT A WASTE

  37. Sam says:

    Another ERT decision was announced this afternoon. The ERT appeal against the Ernestown Wind Farm (west of Kingston, south of Odessa) was dismissed. The decision states that the appellants failed to provide evidence of their claims. The project is permitted to proceed. (Construction has already commenced)

  38. County Steve says:

    Sorry, have to add one more story. While on vacation in Jamaica, I ran into an electrical engineer from Scarborough, whose job is the middle man. He is one of the team who is trying to connect IWTs to the grid. With no success, by the way. He said the Missing Link is power storage and, so far, it has not been developed. He travels all over North America, investigating potential ‘batteries’ which will allow us to store wind and solar power during low demand periods, which can then be emptied into the grid during high demand.
    I can’t give you the entire several hour discussion, but as a CANWEA expert, perhaps Robert might be willing to check back in with more of your flowery propaganda.
    He also noted that there are so many ‘input sources’ into the Ontario grid, that management of electrical power has become a nightmare for him. “Say we go into a low-demand time,” he said. “We power down the IWTs, but the system is designed to compensate for sudden losses of input. So solar boots up to compensate for the loss, so you shut down solar, the next generator in line boots up to compensate, and you get a ‘cascading’ effect right down the line, until you have your power output under control, for the demand required.”
    My final question was: “Do IWTs have a Future in Ontario?” Yes, he said, “but they have no Present.” By the time we get a proper management system in place, it is likely the turbines we’re putting up now will be defunct.
    Sadly, he said “In Ontario, if this had not been politicized, we would have stood a chance. Basically, if the technology we’re trying to develop now were in place, it could have worked. But the Liberal government turned a multi-million dollar project into a multi-billion dollar project … and so far, we can’t make it work.”
    I swear to God this the truth, as it was told to me. So Robert can toot the horn of Justice Come True all he wants, but he’s just hanging a stinking albatross around his neck, and destroying the County is his Enraptured Love for a useless system.

  39. County Steve says:

    Oy! Robert, you poor dupe. I know it’s your job to stand behind the greatest fiasco perpetrated on Ontarians, but Jeez, grow some brain cells. This is not wide open prairie land in Alberta. It is a vibrant community full of people who live here, and came here, to enjoy our beautiful rural landscape.
    If you don’t give a crap about wildlife and their habitat, I get that. The MOE and the MNR also don’t give a crap, so you’re in good company.
    If you don’t care that the Province, in an unprecedented move, removed the voices of individuals, our County Council, our MPP, and ignored the pleas of the Ontario Power Workers, who have stated publicly, through paid advertising, that wind power is uncontrollable, and is of no use to them. I get that. It just means you’re blinded by your convictions. So we’re okay so far.
    But if you read the metro papers, who are just discovering the cost of this debacle, and who report that not a single kilowatt of wind-produced power has been used in the province and, in fact, has been exported, at our expense, to other users.
    If you ignore that, you are indeed peeing into the wind, and none of us here thank you for the backspray.

  40. David Norman says:

    Dear dear dear Robert, you state; “The REA relied on rigorous scientific evidence that the proposed Ostrander Point wind project would produce no serious and irreversible harm to people, plants and animals.” Since you are speaking on behalf of the REA, could you please reference and identify the “rigorous scientific evidence” related to the “proposed Ostrander Point ‘Industrial’ wind ‘Turbine’ project”. Beyond a wind industry produced and funded consultants report I have been unable to find even one peer reviewed scientific study which even remotely addresses the “plants and animals” assertions of this claim … please note, ‘reviews’ are not scientific studies and ‘rigorous’ must meet the basic criterion of scientific methodology.

  41. David Norman says:

    Hornung states; “The Court agreed the Tribunal had determined that opposition groups had not presented solid evidence of irreversible harm to human and habitat health.” An interesting statement pronouncing that there is “harm to human and habitat health” but that in Hornung’s interpretation of the “Court” decision, it is reversible… the “Court” determined there was an “absence” of evidence… what a puerile rhetorical game this is!

  42. BH says:

    Robert Hornung states “The Court’s decision reaffirms that processes are in place to ensure that wind energy projects are developed in a manner respectful of the environment”.

    Ontario Environmental Commissioner
    Environment Canada
    Nature Canada
    Ontario Nature
    Audubon Society (NY State and USA)
    Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (UK)
    The David Suzuki Foundation

    are all against industrial wind turbines at Ostrander Point.

    Therefore, proper processes do not exist.

  43. Doris Lane says:

    Whoever Robert is I love the comment of one person that she thought he had been standing under a turbine too long.
    The whole thing hinges on the GEA and the adverse effect that it has on rural Ontario. Jim asked who is responsible for this turbine mess . well we know who headed it up Smitherman and McGinty Mcginty wanted it to be his legacy. Todd Smith made a motion in the house about McGinty(sorry Todd I do not remember what the exact motion was but Dalton stepped down that night)
    Of course there is big oil behind the whole thing–off shore big business. governments survive by the support of big business . Governments don’t care about PEC
    Roberts little message is totally of base.

  44. Olmanonthemtn says:

    Hmm commenting on a respectful process seems more like” audacious hubris” or better yet “rubbing salt in the wound”

  45. Suzanne Lucas says:

    It is interesting that the process which the Wind industry fnds to be so respectful fails to convince those of us who expect a measure of fairness in the process, especially as it relates to protecting our valued natural heritage. For example the Divisional Court ruled that the Tribunal erred in its judgement of serious and irreversible harm to the Blandings turtle because the Tribunal did not hear any evidence as to the number of turtles at Ostrander Point. But the MOE gave a permit to harm, harass and kill the turtles because it said that the mitigations provided would prove to be an overall benefit to the species. How can the MOE have fairly granted that permit when Gilead failed to provide evidence of the number of turtles at Ostrander Point? To me this is clear evidence of a double standard and so no, the Court’s decision did in no way reaffirm “that processes are in place to ensure that wind energy projects are developed in a manner respectful of the environment.” It reaffirms that there is a double standard that allows big business to run rough-shod over our precious and rare natural landscapes.

  46. TC says:

    Well then – – never mind!

    That Hornung guy says it’s good news.
    I’m glad I read that. Now I feel a lot better.
    He says they used scientific evidence. And he’s a president! Nothing bad can happen.

    Every time I see a squashed turtle or a dead bird out there I’ll just remember that they were killed with respect.

  47. Lori Cairns says:

    Respectful? You want respectful? Okay.

    I respectfully ask you to take your turbines and get lost.

    I respectfully ask you to return the millions of taxpayer dollars that you have taken to use against us. That was a very disrespectful thing to do.

    Feel better now?

    Does he really believe the b.s. that he wrote? If he does, he has been standing under a turbine too long.

  48. Mark says:

    And further disrespect to give the appearance of a credible review process thinking Joe Public will feel protected. The review process is so weighted in favour of big business and their turbines the expense wasted on this sham is in itself scandalous. It’s all about $$$$ and nothing else. We are played for fools! We have no say and we have no local input. We are nothing more than a mere nuisance to Government and Big Business.

  49. Jim McMillan says:

    Robfordism

    70 communities for a variety of reasons are unwilling hosts for the Industrial Wind Terminal Factories.
    But big business and our Liberal government just keeps ramming them down our throats.
    Raping the rural communities with secret deals and armies of lawyers is hardly a respectful.process.

    .Jim McMillan. RR2 Milford

  50. Myrna Wood says:

    In my opinion accepting a Species at Risk Permit to destroy species’ habitat and cause them harm and death, is not a wise decision and is contrary to the responsibilities of the Provincial government under the Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Act as well as their own mandate to protect significant wildlife habitats on our Crown lands.
    Having studied the ‘mitigation measures’ proposed by the wind industry and specifically rejected by the Tribunal panel I know that the counting of dead creatures and the continued study of species’ decline is not what reasonable people would consider ‘mitigation of harm’.
    We will see what future court rulings have to say about this industry.

OPP reports
lottery winners
FIRE
SCHOOL
Elizabeth Crombie Christine Henden
Tony Scott Sharon Armitage

HOME     LOCAL     MARKETPLACE     COMMUNITY     CONTACT US
© Copyright Prince Edward County News countylive.ca 2022 • All rights reserved.