Councillor in awe of volunteers who helped with wind turbine appeal

kawartha_lakesKawartha Lakes This Week, Mary Riley
(MANVERS TWP) Ward 16 Councillor Heather Stauble says she’s “in awe of the amount and the quality of the work” that went into a legal challenge to the building of industrial wind turbines in Manvers Township.

As those fighting wpd Canada’s Sumac Ridge wind energy project prepare for a decision next month, Coun. Stauble had nothing but praise for those who put “a tremendous amount of time, energy and skill” volunteering to help the case.

In December 2013, wind energy company wpd Canada was granted Ministry of Environment (MOE) approval to build Sumac Ridge wind energy farm, which involves building five 500-metre high industrial wind turbines near Pontypool. Two of those would be on the Oak Ridges Moraine. Read article

29 thoughts on “Councillor in awe of volunteers who helped with wind turbine appeal

  1. I have made a new blog post about the affect of TOU rates which you can check out on my blog here:

    tyeselectricityblog.WordPress. com

    Let me know what u think in the comments section below


  2. Councillor Stauble,
    I am sorry to say, that is about as exciting as it will get. You are fooling yourself if you expect sny more and believe you will be successful in winning your case at the ERT. The tribunal is designed to fail the people of rural Ontario. This has been going on for years in Ontario. Tribunals buy more time forctgecwind companies while depleting your resources-costing you money.
    Thousands of hours of research and work has gone into past ERT cases, with no success. You are merely going through the motions with the ERT.
    May I suggest you do all you can to stop the turbines from being built in your community. This will include blockades, deterrents of any kind. Industrial wind turbines are deadly. The community will be divided. Families will be torn apart. It is a horrendous nightmare.
    Trust me, i’ve been there, got the tshirt. That’s about all I have left. Believe the severity of the impact. A storm is a coming.
    The only ones living the dream are the government cronies and the wind companies. You need to be physically pro active NOW. Stand your ground. In your life time it will become of the most important stances you will take.

  3. Metric measurement was brought in around 1975 in Canada.

    You would think by now people like reporter Mary Riley would have caught on to the fact there is a big difference between 500 feet and 500 metres.

    Getting the message out is tough enough without this nonsense.

  4. For this ERT the Province did not call any witnesses. Not smart to upset an ethnic group by having government witnesses for the ERT?

  5. Not sure who would be considered “ethnic” I could make assumptions but am not sure that would be appropriate or that I would like the answer.

    • Don’t stress!

      Buddhist Association of Canada Cham Shan Temple launched an appeal.

      definition and get more from the free Mirriam-Webster dictionary

      If this fails you – I give up.

    • Don’t want to make any assumptions but the alleged “ethnics”, unhappy with the ERT decision against the possibly “ethnic” Cham Shan Temple, may influence a certain alleged “ethnic” voting block in the allegedly “ethnic” urban area known as the Greater Toronto Area.

      This is all highly speculative and has not been proven in court.

      • Oh yeah!
        This calls for some microscopic analysis.

        Key words:
        1. possibly ethnic
        2. alleged ethnic [also includes alleged ethnics]
        3. allegedly ethnic

        and this is part of it? okay!
        ……has not been proven in court.

        All that food my mother fed me – was not really ethnic.
        Wait till she find out.

    • Maybe a lot of people at QP won’t like the answer either? Just wait til this hits the fan in the GTA.

  6. On the topic of
    industrial wind energy projects
    cause harm to human health.

    Beware of Dianne Saxe
    she’s NOT a scientist,
    and she’s willing to see you — harmed
    and put at risk.

    And she’s failed to reconcile
    this observation from Ontario Ministry of the Environment
    Provincial Officer Tim Webb, Badge # 125:

    DATE: October 14, 2010 – 2:36 PM
    FROM : Citizen of Clear Creek, Ontario

    Hi Tim,
    Could you please describe, in your words, the vibrations that you sensed at our house last week at Clear Creek. I was trying to describe those vibrations to friends last weekend in my words. The noise/vibrations were not present last weekend.

    Hi Martin,
    For your information:
    Yesterday at 12:30 noon I felt very strong vibrations with very little noise at the back of the property being generated from the turbine just north of the house. Wind condition was S 9km/h as per Weather Network, so N or NE are not the only conditions for the vibrations. I will try and pay special attention to this when I am at Clear Creek.


    DATE: October 14, 2010 – 16:10
    TO: Citizen of Clear Creek, Ontario

    I would describe it as a sensation that was neither a discernable sound nor a detectable vibration, but somewhere between the two. Definitely more felt than heard. If I concentrated very hard, I could sense something below the hearing threshold, but above what can be felt as a vibration. I have to say, though, that it takes an unusual amount of concentration to even notice it.

    Tim Webb
    Provincial Officer #125
    Hamilton District Office
    Ontario Ministry of the Environment’

    • If you haven’t experienced it for yourself,
      ponder the implications of a home-life, where
      there is “a sensation”, “more felt than heard”.

      In other words, a resonance in your body.

      Do you think it would disrupt your sleep?
      Do you think disrupted sleep is ‘harm to human health’?
      Do you think there could be other physical damages
      caused by this “sensation”?
      Do you think this “sensation” = pain & suffering?

      You don’t have to be a world-class scientist
      to figure it out.

      But you must have at least, ‘half a brain’.
      And you must not ‘commit fraud’.

    • Posted on January 12, 2015

      ‘[excerpt] No scientific evidence for fears about wind turbines

      Study after study around the world has shown that, contrary to what many fear, wind farms at the
      Ontario minimum setbacks do not directly cause serious harm to human health, even though some
      people find them stressful and annoying.

      “73….There is no sufficient evidence that the biological effects observed at the level below 40
      dBLnight,outside are harmful to health…”

      A recent study by Health Canada confirmed that some people find wind turbines stressful and
      annoying, but reached no conclusions as to why they do. In particular, they reported no evidence that
      the wind turbines cause the stress, as opposed to people’s fears about turbines.
      The opponents’ evidence at these hearings revolved around the fears and beliefs that many wind farm
      neighbours have about adverse health effects from wind farms. The appellants argued that it was a
      breach of their Charter rights to the security of the person to expose them to the possibility of these
      But, the Court said, the opponents did not provide an (sic) scientific foundation for those fears:
      “75…the Tribunals did not have before them expert evidence which seriously called into question the
      principle underpinning the ’s renewable energy project regulatory regime[…]”‘

      • So much attention has been focused on the CONTENT of these so called IWT health studies and nothing looked as to how these so called health studies were produced.

        How studies are done (methods) and reviewed can be just as important as their content.

      • video above
        Published Friday, January 16, 2015 4:00PM EST
        CTV Windsor

      • To begin with, IWTs generating electricity is not new but easy to put over on an ignorant audience. Not used because they don’t produce the quantity of electricity required on a reliable basis.

    • Justice Mary Sanderson ordered King to testify but she was granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.

      Was any decision made by the Appeals Court?

      This has been going on for 3-4 years?

    • How can a person refuse to testify when ordered by a court to do so and get away with it?

      The status of this issue needs an immediate explanation as a court order such as this is the people’s business.

      • King should have a copy of any other court decisions that excused her from testifying and with dates.

        Call her again at another ERT. She no longer is CMOH. So using this as an excuse is no longer valid.

      • Keep calling King for ERTs. How many times can she beat the system or did she?

        She needs to show the court records of when and why she was excused in one case that came up where she was called as a witness. This covers only one case and not a blanket excuse for all ERTs?

    • Did the Drennans & company and their counsel forget about the importance of holding Dr. King accountable for her 2010 report and getting her to testify about it?

    Tom Blackwell | National Post | January 16, 2015
    “Inside Canada’s secret world of medical error: ‘There is a lot of lying, there’s a lot of cover-up’”

    ‘[excerpt] Most instances of the system hurting rather than healing patients, in fact, are not even reported by staff internally, a National Post investigation has documented.

    Research suggests that about 70,000 patients a year experience preventable, serious injury as a result of treatments. More shocking, a landmark study published a decade ago estimated that as many as 23,000 Canadian adults die annually because of preventable “adverse events” in acute-care hospitals alone.

    The rate of errors may be even higher today, some evidence suggests, despite the millions of dollars spent on much-touted patient-safety efforts.

    Yet a tiny fraction of those cases are publicly acknowledged and usually only in the form of antiseptic statistics. For most serious treatment gaffes, not even the sparsest of details is revealed, making the vast problem all but invisible.

    The Post has also learned there is no routine, public documentation of one common source of health-care harm — malfunctioning medical devices linked to dozens of deaths and hundreds of serious injuries every year.
    In fact, legislation in most provinces bars information on adverse events being released to malpractice plaintiffs or publicly divulged under freedom-of-information acts. The laws are designed — with limited success — to encourage internal reporting of mistakes.
    A nurse at an Ontario hospital, who asked not to be identified for fear of repercussions, said she works with two surgeons whose skills are so lacking, “I wouldn’t even want them to touch my dog.”

    She filed an anonymous complaint against one several years ago, but little changed. Now, she stays mum about problems ranging from high rates of post-op infections to surgeries frequently needing re-dos.

    “We do turn a blind eye and walk away,” the nurse admitted. “There is a lot of lying, there’s a lot of cover-up, which turns my stomach.”

    By contrast, preventable injury and deaths in many other arenas — from homicides to industrial accidents and road crashes — are routinely divulged by police or other authorities.
    The point of publicizing medical error, patient-safety experts stress, is not to shame or blame, or take away from the fact health care is replete with highly trained, dedicated professionals. Aside from a tiny smattering of true incompetents, no one comes to work expecting to dispense anything but exemplary care, says Rob Robson, a physician who led the Winnipeg health authority’s groundbreaking patient safety program for seven years.
    “You have to tell people that patients are getting hurt,” said Dr. Robson. “As long as the public doesn’t realize that one in 13 people coming into the hospital will experience some kind of adverse event — and that’s the conservative estimate — then there isn’t any pressure to say, ‘Listen, fix these damn things.’ ”

    The risk inherent in hiding such information was tragically highlighted in 1997, when yet another child fell victim to a classic medical error, an error some believe still occurs.

    Doctors at the B.C. Children’s Hospital administered a series of drugs to Kristine Walker, a seven-year-old whose leukemia had come back. Inadvertently, they injected vincristine — meant for intravenous use — into her spinal fluid. Doctors have known since the late 1960s that using the medication “intrathecally” triggers catastrophic, usually fatal neurological damage.

    Kristine became paralyzed and died two weeks later. After her death, the hospital discovered that at least three similar incidents had occurred in other provinces in previous years, reminders of the importance of preventive measures. None were made public or even communicated within the health-care system.

    “We were not able to learn from our own mistakes, nor did we have the opportunity to learn from those of our colleagues,” Lynda Cranston, the hospital’s president, lamented at the time.
    “It’s exhausting physically, it’s exhausting mentally, it’s exhausting on a marriage,” she said. “There’s a bitterness, there’s an anger when it’s from medical malpractice, when it’s preventable … This is at the hands of someone I trusted.”
    “Nurses are very, very cautious about raising issues, blowing the whistle,” said Mr. Summers, who has spent the past five years as vice-president of the Ontario Nurses Association union.

    “If they were part of … the adverse incident, they are going to feel like they’ll be blamed,” he said. “It’s a heavy, heavy burden to take on. Sometimes it’s just easier to keep quiet.”

    In aviation, on the other hand, the culture strives at every turn to promote reporting of safety problems by everyone from baggage handler to flight attendant, even if it means offending the once-God-like pilot, says Mr. Pottinger.

    In fact, it is those who fail to report a safety concern — rather than the whistle blowers — who face possible reprimand.’


    • Yes!
      There’s a lot of cover up.
      One doctor told me – it’s called
      ‘following the process’
      and I said,
      ’till you are dead’.

      Our hospitals are death chambers – for some.
      God Bless the suffering………..

      • “…you are dead.”

        What did s/he say then?

Leave a Reply

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