Ernestown Windpark 45 Day Comment period

commentEnvironmental Registry
Instrument Proposal Notice
: EBR Registry Number: 011-8090
Proponent: Ernestown Windpark Inc. operating as Ernestown Windpark LP
2300 Yonge Street, Suite 801, Toronto Ontario, Canada M4P 1E4
Instrument Type: Approval for a renewable energy project – EPA s.47.3(1)
Ministry Reference Number: 6118-8YXG2S
Ministry: Ministry of the Environment
Date Proposal loaded to the Registry: January 25, 2013
Comment Period: 45 days: submissions may be made between January 25, 2013 and March 11, 2013.

Description of Instrument: This posting is for a proposed Renewable Energy Approval (REA) by Ernestown Windpark Inc., for the Ernestown Wind Park, proposed to be located at Lot 27, Concession 2, Loyalist Township, County of Lennox and Addington, Ontario. This is a Class 4 wind facility with a total expected generation capacity of 10 megawatts (MW). The proposed facility is considered to be a Class 4 wind facility under Ontario Regulation 359/09 (O. Reg. 359/09) Renewable Energy Approvals under Part V.0.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. Applications for Renewable Energy Approvals are required to be submitted in accordance with O. Reg. 359/09 for consideration for approval. Read more
Project Information

20 thoughts on “Ernestown Windpark 45 Day Comment period

  1. WOW !!! Those scumbags are STILL crawling out of the woodwork to slurp at the public trough !!!When will this madness stop ???

  2. Here is the single biggest reason to put a moratorium on all wind projects across North America. First we have the cover-up of millions of bird deaths by the wind industry, which in my opinion has been criminal, but here is something else going on that is just as sinister.

    The industry has been sitting on a bird safe wind turbine design that produces far more energy. They have kept their mouths shut about it so they could keep on selling their eagle killing turbines to the world. It is also my impression that with this design, Infasound will be greatly reduced.

    So why has nobody heard about any of this? Here is what appears to be the industry’s reasoning. This planned obsolescence keeps the profits rolling in and stimulates demand by encouraging purchasers to buy (turbine clunkers) sooner if they still want a functioning product. In this case it is the ignorant saps or communities that are still putting up 25 year bird killing projects. This postponement is why we still have Altamont’s ongoing eagle massacre 28 years after it started.

    What I have said is true and I can prove it. So are wind turbines really about climate change or the ruthless pursuit of profits? It would seem reasonable that anyone interested in climate change would want turbine designs in production that produce the greatest benefit to the world. Especially if there is a new design with far fewer negative impacts. In addition if we are in a crisis taxpayers should also not have to waste valuable time and money on clunkers that produce less energy.

    And while we are on the topic of planned obsolescence, climate change and clunkers, I will remind everyone that we have seen all this before. How long did it take after the 1970’s gas crisis to get reasonable gas mileage standards set for cars? We still do not have them.
    As far as I am concerned, all of this is like the tobacco industry not putting out a cancer free cigarette if they they had developed one or a drug company that had found a cure for cancer but kept it quiet for financial reasons instead of saving lives.

    • It dosent matter if IWTs that kill fewer birds are installed or not. IWTs of any kind don’t affect climate change one way or another due to their need for backup power.

      The introduction of smaller lighter vehicles has led to increased auto fatalities and serious injuries because they don’t provide the same protection that heavier vehicles provide in accidents. All due to the laws of physics which don’t change just because eco-nuts say they can be changed.

      Better gas milage was obtained in general only by reducing the weight and thus the size of autos. The lighter the vehicle the less gas it uses.

      • Car engines themselves have indeed become more fuel efficient. Today’s power plants are driving more pollution controls and luxury add-ons that reduce engine efficiency. Besides vehicle weight, aerodynamics also play a large role in improving today’s fuel economy numbers.

        Lighter vehicles hitting each other have roughly the same effect as heavier cars hitting each other … a trade-off. Today’s lighter cars also have air bags … but that’s a conspiracy for another day.

      • Today’s cars do not provide the protection that heavier vehicles did. And with less protection two small vehicles crashing togther still results in more fatalities and serious injuries. Air bags do help.
        If small cars had enough weight/protection this would be a different situation.Using plastic, composites, and lighter steel does not afford the protection needed.
        What used to be fender benders can now turn into fatalities and serious injuries. This is also one of the reasons insurance rates are so high.
        Manufactures have made and are still trying to make these small vehicles safer for the occupants. Also one of the main reasons why so many people buy pick-up trucks as they afford better protection in crashes.
        This information is available on the internet. When you get speed and weight togther the laws of physics can’t be changed.

    • Jim, you sound like a REAL SHILL for the IWT developers.
      You will not answer this but I’d ike to know who’s PAYING you and HOW.

      • Johana,

        Watch who you criticize and maybe research a bit before spouting off hateful comments. Jim Wiegand is a long-time wind warrior. He is a California raptor specialist and Berkeley-trained wildlife biologist. Try googling his work against the wind industry.

        You sound no better than the people who claim we’re all paid by the oil industry. Allow people the opportunity to post without that nonsense.

    • But there are still all the economic arguments…

      IWT’s were, are and will be an economic disaster for the governments and taxpayers that attempt to make use of them…

      They are a colossal waste of money…

    • Jim,
      I failed to see your comments about the health and social impacts of wind turbines on people?
      Am I missing something?

      • Yes — you missed this…

        The industry has been sitting on a bird safe wind turbine design that produces far more energy. They have kept their mouths shut about it so they could keep on selling their eagle killing turbines to the world. It is also my impression that with this design, Infasound will be greatly reduced.

        Unfortunately the negative economic impacts will remain….

        As for less infrasound… since presumably that comes mostly from beat notes — I will believe that when I don’t hear it.

        IOW — I think that significantly less infrasound from more efficient, quieter IWTs is just hogwash.

      • ..did not miss that.

        ..have been talking about vertical axis wind turbines for years.

  3. Thanks for calling me a nut,
    That gives me all the reason I need to stop reading AND stop posting here.
    I need all my time to try to save my physical health.
    And I refute your claim that my mental health needs a check up.

Leave a Reply

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