More Study needed on Wind Turbines

Ernie Hardeman, Oxford MPP

QUEEN’S PARK – Today in the Ontario Legislature, the McGuinty government voted down an opposition day motion that would have required a study of the health impacts of wind turbines and allowed municipalities and residents to have a say in where the turbines are located.
 
“I support renewable energy but we should not allow the government to force wind turbines into communities without determining the impact on the health of the people who live there,” said Ernie Hardeman, Oxford MPP. “The people of Ontario and their elected municipal officials should get a say in what happens in their town.”
 
The opposition day motion read as follows:
That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario calls for a moratorium on all wind farm projects until an independent, comprehensive study of the health and environmental impacts of wind farms is completed and Premier McGuinty restores the planning authority governing them to municipalities and local boards.
 
As part of the Green Energy Act the McGuinty government exempted wind turbines from the traditional planning process, such that municipalities and residents no longer have a say in where they are located.
 
“The government has said that turbines can be located 550 metres from homes, but they haven’t provided scientific evidence for that distance,” said Hardeman. “What do we do if we discover the setback should be 650 metres, 1000 metres or 2000 metres?”
 
A number of residents from Oxford who are concerned about wind turbines were at the Legislature today for a rally and to attend the Opposition Day motion. During the rally there were a number of speakers who live near turbines and reported negative effects on their health such as sleep deprivation, headaches and dizziness.
 
“I’ve heard from many people who live near turbines and they are reporting major health problems as a result,” said Hardeman. “A responsible and caring government would make sure they had fully investigated those stories and examined the health impacts before they approve more turbines.”
 
– 30 –
For more information, contact:
Ernie Hardeman, MPP Oxford
(416) 325-1239

6 thoughts on “More Study needed on Wind Turbines

  1. “I support Renewable Energy”…………this is the statement made by every politician before entering into any discussion. WHY?

    Do these people not know that there is not a single “renewable form of energy” that works?

    Until there is a renewable form of energy that doesn’t destroy more than it saves, that works, that doesn’t cost people their homes communities and health then it cannot be called “renewable”

    Stop the False Rhetoric!

  2. The reasoning for The Green Energy Act is laid out within itself and the various climate studies produced by the MOE.

    If you believe in the basis of the climate studies, then the Green Energy Act is necessary, and by extension of the principles so are the Wind Turbines. Sacrificing a few people to save the planet would be something that even I could support.

    So here’s the question: Will suing Wind Turbines to generate electricity save the planet? If so, how so?

    Dr. Andrew Weaver (U.Vic.) recently launched a lawsuit to put these principles before the courts.

    You can see the statement of claim here.
    http://www.desmogblog.com/climate-scientist-sues-national-post

    If he wins then there is a legal precedent that the Wind Turbines are required. Think about it.

    It definitely needs more study!

  3. Should be “using Wind Turnings to save the planet”… sheesh.

    Freudian slip?

  4. The health benefits are a big problem and a horrible problem, but the larger picture is industrial wind turbines are a waste of money if energy production for consumers and reduction of carbon is what is supposed to happen. No country/county/province has become less dependent on other “dirty” sources of energy where industrial wind turbines are operating so no one can expect any different here. There is no “new” technology out there to make wind work. There should not have to be an outcry of health concerns as we should not be building industrial turbines at all.

  5. Ask why wind energy cannot be used locally? Why is it shipped away? Industrial wind needs the grids flexibility. It cannot be treated like an energy producer but is treated like an energy user on the grid, because it does not provide a consistent input of energy. The bouncing around does little to contribute to energy requirements. Wind energy meets no demands and will provide no guaranteed output without a reliable source somewhere working harder than if wind was not there. Saying “I support wind but….” is equivalent to saying “I support a higher costing, unreliable, landuse pig of an energy dependent industry that has not been demonstrated to provide much additional power than we already have but….”.

  6. Where/who is doing a health study on the negative effects of wind turbines?
    Protesting and mouthing our concerns does not seem to be working–let’s get some accurate studies done before Hannah’s lawyer goes to court in September.

Comments are closed.