Oneworld Energy Bankrupt

Oneworld Energy was the company behind the Zephyr Wind project in Brooke-Alvinston, Ontario.

“We regret to inform you that Oneworld Energy Inc. filed an assignment of bankruptcy on June 5, 2012 with the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Estate 32-163280. All the remaining subsidiaries of Oneworld are dormant with no assets and/or also bankrupt.

As per Canadian bankruptcy law, creditors have been notified of the bankruptcy process. No funds are expected to be available for secured creditors, unsecured creditors or the shareholders of Oneworld.  Shareholders are advised to contact their financial advisor regarding the tax treatment of their investments.  Should you have any other queries, please email info@oneworldenergy.com.

18 thoughts on “Oneworld Energy Bankrupt

  1. You pegged it in your article, Free Thinker. Maybe they were so broke they couldn’t afford to do studies or print off any paper copies for the public. Losers with a capital L.

  2. Wonder how much secured and unsecured creditors are screwed over for? Also the shareholders. Too bad, so sad.
    Hope others in this type of business are paying attention…. It can happen to them too.

    • Ron & Barbara….. At least it was, hopefully, primarily the share-holders that lost money! If the company, in question, had STAYED in business we’d ALL be losers!! I’m really “hurting” for these poor unfortunate companies who have come to save us from “dirty coal”! Couldn’t McGuinty have done more to “bail” them out? Too bad! So sad!

      • But one of the bigger sharks may take over/buy what assets are left. Maybe the landowners/IWT hosts are out from under their contracts?

  3. In Nov. 2011, Schneider Power, Inc. bought the Zephyr facility, yet it isn’t on Schneider’s list of Canadian operations.
    So who owns it?
    Where does Hydro send the cheque? That’s the idea isn’t it. We all pay for this scam.

    • Business inexperience!!!!!
      The McGuinty strategy to business success:
      ‘the practice of cronyism’

      A man with no business experience resorts to insulting citizens [“But don’t say, ‘I don’t want it around here.’ … NIMBYism will no longer prevail,” he added, using the acronym for “not in my backyard.”]

      A man that will do anything to save the planet; promotes cronyism by giving it
      – the tools [McGuinty said the legislation will also give green power generating companies the “tools” they need to navigate the approvals process for their projects as Ontario copes with the recession and its plan to shut coal-fired power generating plants by 2014 – seven years later than he first promised in the 2003 election campaign.]

      “We need those jobs, we need clean electricity and we need to assume our responsibility in the face of climate change,” McGuinty said.
      http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/585591–mcguinty-vows-to-stop-wind-farm-nimbys

      Mr. McGuinty’s – ‘We need’ mantra – is corrupt!

  4. Because – all politics – is – ‘local’ politics
    Agenda 21 – Smart Growth
    Implementing ‘sustainable development’ – so……………….
    you’ve been informed – by your council

    What’s the trick?

    4.0 Community Consultation and the DPS

    The DPS emphasizes upfront community consultation, focusing public input at the policy and development criteria formation stage, so that the community vision can be implemented and realised at the permit application stage.
    4.1 Lessons Learned, Ontario Demonstration Communities

    When the DPS was first being considered in Ontario, three demonstration municipalities, the City of Hamilton, Township of Lake of Bays and the Town of Oakville conducted community information/consultation sessions on a broad range of subjects related to the DPS. These sessions produced best practices for an effective delivery of the community consultation process.

    Did you know?

    As identified in the Planning Act, when establishing DPS OP policies and the development permit bylaw, or when making an amendment to an established system, council at a minimum must ensure:

    a) At least one open house is held for the purpose of giving the public an opportunity to review and ask questions about the information and material made available
    b) At least one public meeting is held for the purpose of giving the public an opportunity to make representations on the proposed plan and bylaw.

    A best practice that emerged was the understanding that for the DPS to be successful, both the DPS OPA and development permit bylaw must be established through a comprehensive public participation process that develops a broad base of community support for the new system. Another lesson learned was that holding more than one open house and public meeting would help to explain the intent, objectives and differences of a DPS compared to traditional zoning, minor variance and site plan processes, and facilitates public input on a proposed OPA and development permit bylaw. Some further suggested practices included:

    Hold information sessions in more than one location to ensure public input, if the DPS area is proposed to capture a large geographic area
    Host a workshop session or series of sessions with various stakeholder groups to work through the details of the proposed OP policies and development permit bylaw, and receive a wide range of input
    Distribute an information pamphlet or other support materials outlining the highlights of the proposed new system to the public prior to meetings and workshops
    Provide the public with general information regarding the DPS system, how it works, it’s objectives, outcomes and process
    Use visual materials to help explain the impact of the new system and build support for a vision of an area; this is particularly important in an area with specific urban design objectives.

    Did you know?
    Like traditional OP and zoning bylaw amendments the right to appeal a DPS OPA or development permit bylaw remains so long as the person or public body wishing to do so has made an oral submission at a public meeting and/or made a written submission to council prior to council making its decision.
    http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page5911.aspx

    The McGuinty Way – securing freedom and prosperity!
    Ugh!

    • There are three with known connections to Maurice Strong advising the premier on Ontario energy policies.
      The way the “consultaion” meetings are set up makes it almost impossible to record the “information” presented by developers to the general public.

Leave a Reply to harvey wrightman Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *