Airport Turbine Appeal

plane chatham airportMike James, Blackburn News
The appeal by a wind turbine company trying to avoid demolition of its turbines near the Chatham airport will start soon. Officials with GDF Suez say they filed their submission last month.

The Transport Canada deadline to submit the package is today. Government officials say the turbines exceed the height and distance restrictions around an airport, and must be torn down by the end of the year. Read article

6 thoughts on “Airport Turbine Appeal

  1. Another issue in play is that GDF Suez in about 1/3 owned by the French government and the French government is promoting IWTs.

    Might look rather bad for the French government if these C-K Airport IWTs have to be removed.

  2. “…laundered… pleaded guilty to falsifying business records and conspiracy….
    Wikipedia: BNP Paribas

    ‘[excerpt] On 30 May 2014, The Wall Street Journal reported that the United States Department of Justice was negotiating with BNP Paribas over the size of a fine plus a possible guilty plea by the bank for violation of U.S. regulations regarding the bank’s evasion of sanctions. The Department of Justice was seeking a fine in excess of US$10 billion, which was expected to be reduced to $8 or $9 billion upon negotiation.[36] Initial indications said that up to $100 billion from the sanctioned countries of Sudan, Iran, and Cuba had been laundered by BNP Paribas.[37]

    On 1 July, BNP Paribas pleaded guilty to falsifying business records and conspiracy in a New York state court, in connection to these violations. It is also expected to plead guilty to violating money laundering laws in federal court.[38] It agreed to pay $8.9 billion, the largest fine ever for violating U.S. sanctions, substantially exceeding the previous record of $1.9 billion.[11]’

  3. Just heard on London TV news tonight, that Transport Canada has declared that the 8 turbines that are too close to Chatham Airport and therefore were to be removed by December 31 2014 are now “Safe”, so they can stay. Pilots will be instructed of the turbines’ placements to avoid any danger. (As if …) .

  4. From Chatham Daily News, Trevor Terfloth, Dec.10:

    “We’ve stated all along the airport’s been safe and it’s proven in the order,” Mayor Randy Hope told The Daily News on Wednesday. “Now it’s just about moving on. … One more hurdle behind us.”

    According to a media release, the potential safety risks were “mitigated by Nav Canada with the issuance of a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM), which was later replaced with an altered Instrument Approach Procedure Chart so that pilots are aware of the wind turbines and can avoid them.”

    The July order called for the removal of the turbines by Dec. 31, 2014, which was a change from the federal agency originally issuing a letter last year requesting voluntary compliance.

    “We’ve done everything that needs to be (done),” Hope said. “Nav Can says the flight path’s safe.”

    The mayor added it’s uncertain exactly what would’ve happened if the turbines in question had to be removed.

    “We don’t know if the taxpayer was going to be on the hook. That would’ve been a long legal battle,” he said. “No. 1, it just saved a lot of headaches for a lot of people.”

    South Kent Coun. Trevor Thompson called the decision to leave the turbines an “abrupt about-face.”

    Although he was pleased Chatham-Kent wouldn’t face the chance of being hit with costs, the councillor admitted he felt conflicted.

    “There’s so many different political sides to take on the turbine issue,” he said. “It’s a strange beast with a lot of different angles to it. It all comes down to which side of the fence you’re on on the turbine issue on the whole.”

    Thompson said he spoke to many pilots who had differing views concerning the turbines at the airport.

    Municipal officials will meet with Transport Canada early next year to discuss how the situation can be avoided in the future by ensuring that no new wind turbines are constructed in the AZRs.

Leave a Reply

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