New wind turbine setback set in Saugeen Shores

By John Divinski, Bayshore Broadcasting

Saugeen Shores council is now on record increasing the setback allowance for wind turbine development.

The setback is now one thousand meters as opposed to the provincially mandated 550 meters.

Leader Resources Services representatives were on hand with a presentation and suggested the proposed setbacks constitute a moratorium on wind development.

Comments from three people — Deputy Mayor Luke Charbonneau , Vice deputy mayor Doug Gowanlock, and from a Kincardine/Saugeen Shores farmer Les Kempers who approached Leader to develop a wind farm on his property and that of his parents — sums up the arguments.

Charbonneau says the 550 meter setback number seems to be one that has been plucked out of the air.

He says the municipality’s one thousand meter setback came on the recommendation of the Medical Officer of Health for Grey Bruce, Doctor Hazel Lynn.

Gowanlock says they’re concerned about the potential health effects on its citizens and wants to see a delay in future development.

Kempers says it’s nothing but posturing and grandstanding by some Saugeen Shores councillors.

He says the landowners, who invited Leader to develop wind farms in Arran Elderslie and North Bruce, do not want Saugeen Shores spending tax dollars on a court challenge in this regard, when the Green Energy Act supercedes everything anyway.

But, he says, if that challenge is made, he will support wind turbine development.

Meanwhile, Leader Communications Manager Heather Boa says they will continue to try to work with the municipality and keep the dialogue channels open.

She says they will again look at their project in light of the new bylaw.

18 thoughts on “New wind turbine setback set in Saugeen Shores

  1. No the landowners who “invited Leader to develop wind farms in Arran-Elderslie and North Bruce” would rather stick it to their neighbours obviously. How do these people sleep at night?

  2. I am in total agreement with Saugeen Shores Council to increase the setback distance to 1000 meters, and in fact,in my opinion, it isn’t far enough, but you have to start somewhere..The landowner(s) who invited Leader to develop these things in our back yard, is indeed sticking it to his neighbors, big time.. These people have absolutely no compassion for humanity, don’t give a darn about anything but the almighty dollar..A sad, sad situation it is.. As a landowner in the proposed affected area, It boggles my mind how these people think…We can only press on, and fight to have these “strangers” go back where they belong, which is not here in our rural community..

  3. 550 meters setback was likely an arbitrary number. That number would allow for fitting the largest number of wind turbines into southern Ontario. Since most townships are laid out with 1 to 1 1/4 mile between concession roads the 1000 meter set back to the nearest neighbouring home would in my opinion keep the turbines out. A solution (if the turbines have to be built) would be that the wind farm companies be allowed to build on crown land in northern Ontario rather than use prime farm ground here (I still can’t beleive our farm organizations are not outraged at the loss of ten’s of thousands of acres of prime land).

  4. John: Great ad. Short to the point works. Keep our environment turbine free and that includes Crown land. IWTs are too costly and provide little if any power gains.

  5. In the UK the setback is 2000-3000m.
    ONT had to figure out a distance that would fit into the heavily populated area in order to make it ‘work’. To heck with the people that live there.

    It is a good ad. Keep at it.

  6. I like the Manvers video. This election, as with the Provincial one, is about voting for the party who will do the least amount of development with Industrial Wind Turbines. One issue vote for me.

  7. Need some help with site info.
    I will be putting a challenege to local High Schools in my area through our local Paper in hopes they take the challenge on.
    The intention is to have these kids learn to not blindly accept what they are told.
    Questions such as:
    Do we really have an energy Crisis
    Has Deregulating Hydro in Ontario made it better as was claimed?
    Is the present pricing system where you pay to produce and not to produce fair to us?
    Windturbines :
    Do they really produce the power they claim?
    Do they really not cause health issues?
    Do they harm wildlife ?
    How many would be required to power Toronto ?
    And what would that look like in Ontario.
    How and where are they manufactured?

    Things like that, input is appreciated.

    I need sites that they can use other than Gore’s , Suzuki’s , Gov’t and Wind Industry to balance the information.

  8. Ernest – have the kids start with this site and search through the Member Sites links on the right. Another useful site is Stop Ill Wind – run by Jon Boone. Lots of excellent facts and arguments.

  9. Looks like ‘green’ programs in Toronto are facing a review – using real math.

    “Del Grande added $130-million has been spent from a reserve fund on green initiatives during the past three years and he hasn’t seen much evidence of where the money has gone.

    Councillor Doug Ford agreed the environmental programs really need to be reviewed.

    “There’s millions of dollars being put into an area that as far as I’m concerned is a front for the unions and special interest groups,” he said. “They are not core programs.”

  10. Ernest – That’s a noble effort – to re-educate the kids. The text books mine bring home (grade 5, 7 and 9) are so infiltrated with alternative energy, green energy, “we’re killing the planet and going to hell” opinions (and that’s all they are); I wouldn’t know where to begin.

    The Grade 7 science text my daughter brought home recently quotes David Suzuki in the opening sentence !!

  11. Countygirl , I can’t use this site because it would appear I am biased.

    I am hoping the challenge will be picked up , I have started with Saugeen Shores.
    And will move on to Owen Sound , then Collingwood , Barrie etc.
    The idea is to have a pro and con discussion and get students to learn to question.
    My first set of questions are:
    Do we really have an immediate Energy crisis?
    If so , why do we not have enough energy ?
    Has turning to Private Business for Energy given us low energy prices that were promised ?

  12. Ernest,
    You wouldn’t be using this site, just the links from it, which can also be found elsewhere.
    Maybe the “Other Sites” listed to the right would be helpful? You already know that one site links to the next and so on.
    If the kids just Google “are wind turbines green,” or “do wind turbines kill birds?” they will be lead to sites run by big wind filled with fiction, not facts.
    Your plan sounds wonderful. Good luck.

  13. Any other questions to put out there will be appreciated.
    The idea is to first have them understand what happened with our Ontario Hydro under NAFTA.
    Then conclude if in fact the benefits of privatization are true.
    Investigate if in fact we really have an impending doom energy crisis
    Then learn why and who has caused it if in fact this is true
    Then we lead up to Windturbines
    Are the countries used as a comparison in fact finding them positive?
    Are they without adverse health effects as claimed?
    How many windturbines would be required to have enough reliable power to shut one coal plant down…Etc.

  14. Ernest,
    I am not sure if this fits in with your ideas, these are a few good websites to have a look at.

    The 3% Challenge, newspaper

    The 3% Challenge, website

    Wind Turbines can be Hazardous to Human Health

    On the top of this page-website there are various sections that cover all of these things.

Comments are closed.