FOI reveals MOE plan to help families impacted by turbines – but where did the report go?

suppressionMinistry of Environment Provincial Officers confirmed adverse health effects of wind turbine noise years ago. A new Freedom of Information report reveals provincial field officers were working on an abatement plan to help families who were being impacted by both wind turbine noise and by the transformer station. But where did the report go?

  • The report was completed in August 2009 prior to the implementation of the Green Energy Act regulations.
  • As you read through the documents it is clear the officers were trying very hard to get some relief for the impacted homeowners. (See the Abatement Plan dated August 2009.)
  • These efforts and warnings were made and discussed before Chief Medical Officer of Health Arlene King had started working on her literature review that was released in May 2010. How could this important information have not reached her desk? Even as families who were being impacted were reaching out to her for help she chose not to investigate or speak with them. Why?
  • Who in the MOE was responsible for informing her about the complaints that the Provincial Officers Abatement plan expressed?
  • While the government may claim that new turbine projects post-GEA have stricter controls the fact is that the acceptable noise levels did not change (40 and up to 51 dBA as acceptable levels) and those living in the turbine projects can tell you without hesitation that the setback of 550 metres makes no difference on these noises.
  • It makes sense now when thinking back to the various families in the project who were being told they were the only one making a complaint.
  • It makes sense thinking of those who were repeatedly told projects are in compliance even when engineering reports clearly pointed to the contrary.
  • It makes sense when you read portions revealed that were taken from a letter from the wind developer September 28, 2009:
    “An enormous investment has been made to build Canada’s largest and premier wind energy facility….To assist in bringing this discussion to closure we request a meeting in part to review the facts surrounding both the TS and the wind turbine generators and even more importantly to explain policy and the legal reasons why the maintenance of a consistent position by the MOE is extremely important, both to xxx and to the cause of Green Energy in Ontario”   (TS= transformer station)

And consider these observations from the Abatement Plan dated August 2009 drawn up by the Provincial Field Officers:

1.1 Noise emissions from xxx….. xxx County wind turbines….are producing large numbers of complaints (dating back to March, 2006) alleging adverse health effects (i.e. harm or material discomfort, allegations of adverse effects on health, rendering property unfit for human use, loss of enjoyment of normal use of property, and, interference with the normal conduct of business), due to noise emissions from the 133 wind turbines, and the associated step-up transformer station.

1.5 MOE Provincial Officers have attended at several of the complainant’s residences and have confirmed that despite the noise emissions apparently complying with the applicable Cof A limits that the noise emissions are in fact causing material discomfort to the residents in and around their homes.

1.6 GDO Provincial Officers have measured wind turbine noise levels at complainant’s homes that appear to indicate non-compliance with the CofA(Air).

2.4 the conventional approach to addressing noise complaints by requiring compliance with the applicable NPC guideline limits will not address this set of complaints. This would also appear to be the case for a number of other wind turbine facility complaints across the province.

3.5 As it has been verified by MOE Provincial Officers that an adverse effect is occurring and therefore a contravention of S.14 (1) EPA is occurring that appropriate abatement action must occur forthwith and if necessary be made mandatory via a provincial officer order.

This begs some obvious questions:

  • What has been happening at the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario been these past 4 years? They’ve been inundated with information and documentation.
  • Did the MOE share their vast knowledge of problems with Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health?
  • Why does the government continue to issue approvals for even more turbines when complaints are still being made?
  • We must DEMAND a public inquiry into the wind energy policy! Why is this still being ignored and why are there families still suffering?

Contact your MPP’s, MP’s and authorities and demand an investigation!

The families experiencing problems must have immediate resolution and no more turbines erected until the people of Ontario get to the bottom of this!

FYI: This freedom of information request took almost 1 ½ years to obtain. While told there were over 300 pages collected a scant 26 pages were released and many of those pages are heavily redacted. What information has been withheld?

48 thoughts on “FOI reveals MOE plan to help families impacted by turbines – but where did the report go?

  1. This is unbelievable. On what basis can the provincial government withhold factual information related to the adverse health implications of wine turbines. This is clearly a coverup of information that would demonstrate how bad and poorly thought out the policy behind the Green Energy Act actually was.

  2. HOW INSULTING TO EVERYONE WHO HAS HAD THEIR COMPLAINTS DISMISSED BY THE MOE

    One month after the regulations were promulgated and 7 months before Arlene King’s report, the October 29, 2009 email from the MOE REGIONAL DIRECTOR reads:”I went out last night for about 5 hours (got home midnight) and got some real first hand experience with different types of noise that the turbines can create. The same turbine or groups of turbines could create 3-4 different types of noise and at different magnitudes at different times in the evening all depending on meteorological conditions, time of day, their orientation, and how they readjusted themselves (auto or by manual control – we don’t know) to wind speed and direction. Also I was able to experience first hand wind shear conditions (no wind at ground but turbines still generating and creating noise) and how that plays an important role in noise impacts.”

    Is this not what victims have been describing to the MOE for years? What happened to this information?

    ARLENE KING SHOULD RESIGN IMMEDIATELY ALONG WITH EVERYONE WHO WAS AWARE OF THE INFORMATION IN THESE EMAILS. SHAMEFUL

  3. Complaints should have also been made directly to the companies that were causing these problems and copies kept of the complaints.
    If this was not done then the IWT developers can say they knew nothing about any complaints about IWTs and MOE never let them know. So all MOE’s fault.

    • Oh trust me. Every developer and every moe rep knows. No more “loop holes”. This is criminal!

  4. I have said on many occasions that all the facts were known before the GEA was implemented — including the financial mess they would cause and that they were completely ineffective at delivering meaningful quantities of energy, and that it was well known that they could not replace coal based electrical plants.

    Keep looking — get the rest of the documents.

  5. Pingback: Ministry of Environment investigated health concerns of Wind turbine victims BUT reports never got to Medical Officer of Health??? « The Big Green Lie

  6. Charge them with “dereliction of duty”, “conspiracy to defraud”, or any other criminal charge that some smart lawyer can come up with………………Geezuz…………………the Police are on the Wind protesters like white on rice, yet these Government “servants” are allowed to conspire, hide and cover up real legal reports of harm?
    Maybe someone should phone the OPP and have King and her crew charged with reckless endangerment or worse!

  7. It could not be more obvious what has been,and still is, happening to our communities. The wind co. in conjunction with the government, have decided it is better to let us suffer than to risk letting the truth out and losing billions of dollars that they could be stealing from us via our energy bills and taxes. We are going to have to drag it out of them and make it public before we can fix the problems they have caused. The scam that has been perpetrated on people all over the world will shock all of those whom actually thought the government was trying to improve our pollution problems. All they really wanted to do is make themselves look good, and steal money from the people, many of whom are already struggling to pay their bills. The tyranny they have imposed on the rural community was nothing more than a way to abuse us without our being able to defend ourselves. Do you really think it could be a good idea to turn our precious farmland into a giant power producing plant, then sell our inexpensive energy off to other countries for nothing or next to it? Common sense would tell you otherwise. We are at the bottom of this pyramid scheme, and if we do not put a stop to this immediately, we won’t be able to afford to stretch our budget to last from one pay cheque to the next.

  8. Is anyone else pi**ed off that the citizens of Ontario have to do the Premiers work when it comes to researching IWT’s and turning over every rock to find the truth? I despise being abused by my government like this.

    • I would like to see them pay for the trouble they have caused. But not out of taxpayers money, out of their own pockets. This was outright criminal. They should be treated as such. University of Turbines 101….unfortunately, this useless information we have accumulated is all that we have to save ourselves. When we get rid of these useless machines, we can go back to enjoying nature, our health, our families and friends….you know, the finer things in life.

  9. The fish rots from the head. There is a reason why our provincial legislature is prorogued. It is because the stench is too unbearable for McGuinty, Bentley or any other liberal to sit in.

  10. Do these MOE officials have names? If they can be identified, they should be charged. Start at the bottom and work up. Don’t stop untill you reach the office of the Premier. Oh! , I forgot that weazel Mike Crawley, the current president of the federal Liberal Party (recently president of the prov. liberals.) A major consultant in drafting the province’s green energy policy, even though he was president of A.I.M. at this time and was shortly after awarded a contract worth half a billion dollars. I think it was established at an international court ( in Nurenburg ) that minor officials cannot evade responsibility by claiming that they were only obeying orders from above. One thing I’ve always wondered – don’t our ” public servants” swear an oath of office before they are allowed to begin ” serving ” us ? Clayton Ruby’s a good (sic) lawyer, and he hates corruption in public officials. Could he be persuaded to take this on ” pro bono” ?

  11. Pingback: MOE Secretly Planning to Assist IWT Victims | WAINFLEET WIND ACTION GROUPWAINFLEET WIND ACTION GROUP

    • Clayton Ruby, LL.B, LL.M
      Ruby@rubyshiller.com

      Clayton C. Ruby is one of Canada’s leading lawyers, an outspoken proponent of freedom of the press, and a prominent member of the environmental community. Mr. Ruby received his LL.B. from the University of Toronto and his LL.M. from the University of California (Berkeley).

      Mr. Ruby, who specializes in criminal, constitutional, administrative and civil rights law, has devoted his professional career to ensuring that those who are underprivileged and those who face discrimination are given equal access to the legal system of this country.

      Many of his cases have been high-profile:

      He represented Donald Marshall Jr., who spent 11 years in jail after being wrongly convicted of murder, at the Royal Commission on the Donald Marshall Jr. Prosecution, which brought wrongful miscarriages of justice under new and more careful scrutiny;
      He negotiated a settlement for the three surviving Dionne quintuplets, who were removed from their parents by the provincial government in 1934 and put on display in Quintland, a commercial theme park designed to boost Ontario’s depression-ravaged economy;
      He obtained an acquittal for Guy Paul Morin, who was wrongfully accused of murdering a child, at Mr. Morin’s first trial. After subsequent appeals and conviction, Mr. Morin showed by DNA evidence that he could not have committed the offense;
      He was counsel at the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Askov et al, a case that successfully established a constitutional guarantee to a speedy trial, and incidentally resulted in tens of thousands of cases being stopped for unconstitutional delay by the prosecution;
      He successfully fought against discrimination policies based on sexual orientation in the Canadian military. As a result, in 1992, the Canadian Armed Forces, under Federal Court Order, discarded all discriminatory and restrictive policies regarding the service of gay military personnel.

      In addition to his extensive legal practice and advocacy, Mr. Ruby is editor of Canadian Rights Reporter (a series of court reports for lawyers focusing on constitutional rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms). He is a member of the Advisory Board of PEN Canada which champions freedom of expression for writers in prison. His published legal writing includes: a textbook for lawyers entitled Sentencing, 8th edition, 2012; and LawLawLaw, 1973.

      In the environmental arena, he is a Director of ForestEthics Advocacy; chair of Earthroots and was made an honorary director of EcoJustice (formerly Sierra Legal Defence Fund) after serving on its board for many years. He has been a director of the Greenpeace Canada Charitable Foundation.

      In late 2005, Mr. Ruby served as the acting Treasurer of the Law Society of Upper Canada, for which he has served as a Bencher (the governing Board) since 1977. No other lawyer, since the founding of the Law Society in 1797, has been elected a Bencher for so many consecutive terms by the legal profession.

      In 2006, Mr. Ruby was made a Member of the Order of Canada. In addition, for devoting his career to ensuring that those who are underprivileged and those who face discrimination are given equal access to the legal system of this country, Mr. Ruby was awarded Doctor of Laws degree (honoris causa) by the Law Society of Upper Canada in 2006. More recently, in 2012, Mr. Ruby was bestowed with the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal.

      • He is associated with the very people who are promoting IWTs. Hire the fox to help you?

      • Sad, but true!
        ‘[excerpt] In the environmental arena, he is a Director of ForestEthics Advocacy; chair of Earthroots and was made an honorary director of EcoJustice (formerly Sierra Legal Defence Fund) after serving on its board for many years. He has been a director of the Greenpeace Canada Charitable Foundation.’

        That’s how it is.

      • I can’t believe this guy wasn’t given a Knighthood not to mention a run at being the Pope!…………..could he actually be the “second coming”?……………………….Geez!..this is like reading a horror novel!

      • Then look at all the OCs who are involved in the renewable energy scam.

      • Jack & Ontariwoe dug up some great information. Guys, keep on digging!

  12. Dirty, dirty, dirty.
    I totally support a full inquiry, but who is going to move that forward?
    Unbelievable that corruption of this magnitude is and has been going for several years now. I shouldn’t be surprised. After all, show most people some $$$$$$ and any morals, values and ethics go out the window. Disgusting.

  13. Proroguing is delaying, buying McGuinty time, providing a temporary “out”‘for some. If anyone is more suited than Clayton Ruby to move this forward, please step up to the plate. We cannot afford to let this drag on. Enough is enough. Time is past due to blow these bastards out of thewater (so to speak).

  14. I believe J. Gerretsen (wind promoter extraordinaire)
    was Minister of the Environment around this time frame.
    Would not have been beyond him to stifle any info
    negative to the development of the wind industry.

  15. They’re all guilty
    Gerretsen, Wilkinson, Bradley, Smitherman, Duguid, Bentley, McGuinty, Broten… we can go on and on…..

  16. And still Appeals are dismissed. We need to wake-up. The judicial system WILL NOT help us. Lawyers and Judges will not save us… we need to saver ourselves. Until we are willing to block roads and stand-up for those who are suffering… more and more IWTs will go up.

  17. We’re on our own guys and gals……………………why would we expect elected officials that begged US for OUR vote want to be honest and work on OUR behalf?…………….after all, their pay cheque only comes from US! then an election comes along and they come back outside to the streets to plead with US all again to make sure they can still go to work………..welcome to bizarro world!

  18. Government – abatement plan

    ‘[excerpt] A new Freedom of Information report reveals provincial field officers were working on an abatement plan to help families who were being impacted by both wind turbine noise and by the transformer station.’

    The ‘abatement plan’ – could only be – by way of ‘government regulation’
    The ‘greens’ would have freaked.
    A discussion in the legislature – about an ‘abatement plant’?
    ……..hahahahahahahahaha
    Obviously – a document dump took place – quietly – maybe.

    Well – it’s open for argument!
    Nobody saw anything!

    • The Liberal ‘contingency plan’ – are you ready?
      pass the buck – over to the municipalities.
      So – who’s laughing now?

  19. You people are getting excited for nothing….their abatement plan is a set of blinds and a few pairs of earplugs. There, now its all better isn’t it? The flicker has been abated, the noise has been abated, Problem solved!

  20. Pingback: NA-PAW supports Ontario anti-wind groups calling for the resignation of Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Arlene King | Quixotes Last Stand

  21. Below, is why you must get noise testing done at your home. And send in all the complaints and save all of the records.

    To: Ms. Heidi Ritscher, Manager Corporate and Freedom of Information Services, Information Management and Access Branch.

    Re: Your letter dated November 23, 2012. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act Request Our File # A-2011-03046. Also known as Ministry of Environment Provincial Officers confirmed adverse health effects of wind turbine noise years ago

    You state in your letter “in August 2011, the ministry refined its noise measurement protocol for wind turbines. … allows the ministry to determine the specific source of noise (i.e., distinguish the turbine noise level from the background noise level).”

    In December 2011 the MOE conducted noise testing for wind turbines at my house. Who ever analyzed the test results from these tests (there was no signature on the test documents, I guess he/she was too ashamed of their work to sign it) stated that they were NOT able to distinguish between the noise of the wind turbine and other noises.

    Furthermore some of the test results were considered unusable. The reason stated by the MOE: Rain and high humidity. MOE equipment did not record any rain, it was not raining and the humidity was 66% per MOE records.

    The statement you made in this letter is false. You are simply spewing political drivel instead of conveying the truth of MOE wind turbine noise testing.

    What is the reason that you do this? Do you feel your job is in jeopardy if do not do what is instructed? There are laws in Ontario that will protect you from this type of action from your employer. Or perhaps you have seen too much and believe that your government will not protect you in this situation. Considering the documents in question wouldn’t that be ironic.

    Since this is an issue that concerns the public’s well being. This is a public letter. It has been sent to a wide variety of government departments, plus many other locations.

    Have a nice day.
    David Libby

    • Did it go to the Ontario Ombudmans office David?
      They seem to have a whack of stuff that they are doing nothing about.
      Something very corrupt going on.

  22. I love letters like this. I get a visual of the green tinge to their complexion as they read and ponder their future…or lack thereof. You are a true diplomat Mr. Libby, you even wished them a nice day!

  23. Change the names and locations to, let’s say Massachusetts, USA, and the story is the same…just a different set of characters who are willfully negligent in their push for this fools errand (wind technology in its current form)
    When do the prosecutions begin and how will justice be accomplished for those whose lives have been so severely altered?

  24. I think if you study the legislation regarding the responsibilities of ‘civil servants’, ‘public servants’, ‘the government bureaucracy ‘ or indeed any of our public sector ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’ you will find that unless you can prove a cast iron criminal case against them then legislation has been in place for years protecting them from being either in Conflict of Interest or of any Liability resulting from any action or decision they may have made or taken in the pursuit of their job!

    They are not even required to stand for re election every four years but are safe and secure until a tax funded early retirement becomes available! Just who do you think are still signing off FIT approvals on a daily basis without a care in the world with the approval of a MoE staff who have only recently been forced to release documents proving just how corrupt the entire wind energy scam has been even before it became the scam it now is in Ontario? All these guys and gals are totally protected and safe. Why do we waste time believing we can change that situation?

    A better hope would be to throw your support behind an elected Township Council being sued by private wind energy companies! Unfortunately the same courts with the same lawyers, but although the wind energy companies will use the Green Energy Act to try to hide behind they do not have the same legislated protection as government. If one small court in one small community recognizes that an elected township council does have an obligation to protect what they believe are the best interests of their constituents under the Municipal Act and on the oath they take when assuming office then we have the very small beginnings of a case that could eventually stop all this insanity?

    Andrew Watts

Leave a Reply

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