Wind turbine fires ignore pathetically short setbacks

This is in Estonia. Could be Ontario. Except Ontario firefighters are told to evacuate the area and let it burn out… you can imagine the spread of this fire if the firefighters didn’t put the flying debris’ flames out.

26 thoughts on “Wind turbine fires ignore pathetically short setbacks

  1. This is a serious problem here for us in Canada.

    We have NO fire protection in any of these IWT`s in Canada!

    No laws or rules to even govern these energy companies.

    In Europe where they are familiar with these machines they enforce fire detection and control in all industrial wind turbines right from the factory!

    Where are we Canadians on this? Why have we not insisted on the same laws for our country?

    Do we not want air conditioning in our cars in the summer? We should have the fire control option in our turbines!

    Believe it or not a lot of these turbines in my area do not even have fire extinguishers inside. Technicians need to carry them around with them when in the turbines???

    Grey – Highlands municipality, Huron – Kinloss and a few others have formed legal municipal by laws enforcing fire detection and control.

    We are in the process in Lambton County of trying to make this by law a reality here also and could use any assistance available as these are big corporations we are dealing with.

    Seems like these IWT`s are coming regardless?

    I`m concerned that possibly my children or yours will end up wind technicians some day and will have to work in these environments without the chance of survival if a fire started while they were working in there!

    Hoping like most issues that are hard to change that we will not require fatalities here to see the need for fire protection!

    • Hey Concerned Neighbour,

      Legal municipal by-laws =
      ‘Feeding the dog – after the dog is dead’

      Welcome to local municipal government –
      working it – with facts.

      • Hey Free Thinker,

        Appreciate your comments about feeding dogs.

        However, Presently we have over 1000 IWT`s within 1 hour of our house!

        So…. since feeding the dead dog or whatever you are trying to do is not working maybe broaden your approach to potential issues?

        These machines are here and more are coming whether we like it or not!

        There`s some facts for you!

        All I`m trying to do is have these machines installed safely so flaming parts do not go flying across the countryside.

        This is a serious issue for all of us.

      • Hey Concerned Neighbour,

        Again – Welcome to local municipal government –
        working it – with facts;
        planning your future!


        Important Date: May 11th, 2015

        Overview of Issues (2011);
        1. Climate Change
        2. Renewable Energy,%202011.pdf


        NEW! One of the first steps in the review process is the preparation of background reports for key issues/problems that will be addressed by the updated Official Plan. These background reports will form the basis for changes to the existing Official Plan’s goals and policies.

        *** Updated Background Reports will be available for review on May 11, 2015. Please check back then. ***

        p.s. Climate Change? – Renewable Energy?
        p.p.s. etc.

      • Working in the dark – requires secrecy!
        Why list all the by-laws – when you can ask for the one
        you know they are hiding.


        We have many bylaws that regulate items such as animal control, property standards, parking, beach use, open air burning, height of fences etc.

        Copies of other bylaws are available by contacting the Clerk’s Department.
        Most Commonly Requested By-laws

        p.s. please help find all the by-laws!
        – they should be listed for all to see.

      • Compare the rural situation to fires in towns and cities.

        When a house in town or in the city catches fire and the fire spreads to neighbours’ houses then the neighbours’ fire insurance pays for the neighbours’ fire damage.

        This is why the distance between neighbouring buildings affects how much it costs for your fire insurance.

        Check with your insurance agent.

  2. Question that I am still fuzzy about is who is liable when one of these things throws ice, tosses a blade or catches fire and spreads burning debris across the landscape? Is it the wind company or is this a surprise for the farmer who leased his fields? Given how secretive the contracts are and how unbalanced these proceedings are I would guess its the farmer. But it would be nice to know, I think.

    • The OFA abandoned Ontario farmers a long time ago –
      and still on going!

      In a court of law – you are still an adult @ 18;
      but of course,
      farmers looking for excuses
      – could cause confusion;
      they gagged themselves!

      Welcome to Ontario – and farmers!

  3. My guess is no one would be held liable – Bet if the farmer (leaseholder) check with their insurance they would say the wind company – wind company insurance would say the lease holder. Or, like our county board member said “those things don’t burn like that – that picture is fake”. This, after we had a person who lived near IWT and testified about the noise (we were asking for better setbacks). The board member said “close your windows”.

    • “The board member said ‘close your windows” and you forgot to add “cough in their face” . The OFA has declared war on the innocent neighbours of these Weapons of Mass Destruction.
      Real farmers don’t plant useless IWTs.
      They plant crops & protect their land for future generations, not destroy it forever & a day.

  4. There was quite a discussion OWR about IWTs and insurance issues maybe a couple of years ago.

    Insurance is done on a case by case or for the individual. So each property could be different and there are different insurance companies as well.

    In general, IWT owner, is a tenant on the property and would have something like tenant’s/renter’s insurance on the IWTs.

    If the tenant, IWT owner, has insurance for any damage done to the landlord’s property or to the neighbours is the question at hand.

    The only way to know this is to ask the IWT owner. If the IWT owner declines to answer then probably no insurance to cover damage to neighbour’s property. The landlord/host may be just out of luck in these situations. How many times in the past have tenants done damage to landlord’s property and just walked away?

    • And let’s assume the neighbour – the one that just sustained damage
      from an IWT,
      has insurance covering his property.

      Personally if it were me – I’d call my insurance company
      and report the incident.

      Of course – I would hope my insurance company wouldn’t drop me
      – after dealing with my claim.

      • I just had another novel idea:

        United Nations Insurance!

        I was just checking
        if the United Nation’s – had good insurance rates
        but the page I was looking for – is now missing;
        but another ‘homepage’ – looks exciting!

        UNEP Finance Initiative Innovative financing for sustainability

        My insurance agent thinks I’m nuts.

      • Hey Ontario!

        Municipalities better bump up –
        – their ‘climate change’ insurance policy – and lead by example!
        I trust – they are prepared –
        Re: implementing Agenda 21 –
        in the path of ‘climate change’ – lawsuits.

        June 30, 2014
        Wet Suit: Insurers Seek Damages From Towns Over Climate Change
        Farmers Insurance is diving into the climate change issue by suing municipalities over flooding

        ‘[excerpt] Farmers Insurance has filed nine class action lawsuits against dozens of municipalities around Chicago, and everyone from local governments to other insurers has taken notice. The charge? Failing to prepare adequately for heavy rains and flooding caused by increasingly warmer temperatures—in short, by climate change.

        The insurer, a subsidiary of Zurich Insurance Group, says that the municipalities should pay for damage that was caused by a massive April rainstorm back in 2013 that was so heavy it overwhelmed the storm drain and sewage systems, resulting in evacuations, sewage backups into more than 600 homes and other damage. Why should they do that? Farmers says that the municipalities should have anticipated the downpour and taken action in advance of the storm.

        The municipalities are expected to argue that they cannot be held liable because of government immunity. However, the insurance company has cited in its suit the Chicago Climate Action Plan as an example that municipalities “should have known that climate change in Cook County has resulted in greater rainfall” volume, intensity and duration than pre-1970 rainfall history.

        Because of the existence of the Chicago Climate Action Plan, the Farmers suit claims, the onus was on municipalities to act more aggressively. In fact, Farmers says the Climate Action Plan indicates that the reclamation district was cognizant of the risks posed by climate change; it has also characterized the damage as “completely preventable.”

        In 2009, Swiss Re issued a report that compared the potential financial damage to the insurance industry from future claims for climate change losses to that from asbestos claims. In suits brought against the industry regarding asbestos, one argument was that because insurers had handled so many asbestos claims, that gave them expert knowledge of its risks. Therefore they should have issued warnings about how dangerous the substance could be.’

      • Your insurance agent thinks UR nuts?


        What insurance did she offer for that???

  5. For example, if a vehicle veers off the road and damages your property then the person who owns the vehicle is responsible for any damage. If the person who caused the damage doesn’t pay then your insurance will likely pay for the damage.

    And check what your insurance will cover on your property, being the neighbour of IWTs, or won’t cover.

    • We had a neighbour’s tree hit our house, causing $13,000 damage. Since we were the ones with damage, our insurance company had to pay, not our neighbour’s insurance.

  6. Pingback: Sign a Wind Lease in Haste, Repent at Your Leisure! | "Mothers Against Wind Turbines™" Phoenix Rising…

  7. NTSB/National Transportation Safety Board
    NTSB Identification:CEN14FA224

    About the April 27, 2014 airplane impact with blades of a wind turbine near Highmore, South Dakota.

    Scroll down to: Additional Information:

    Wind Turbine: Identified in this report as belonging to NextEra. Impact time was at 2116:33.

    There were no employees at the wind turbine maintenance facility when the accident occured.

    “The NextEra Control Center in Juno Beach, Florida received an immediate alert when the collision occurred. The company response would have been to send an employee to the wind turbine the next morning to determine why the turbine had gone offline.”

    Are Ontario NextEra wind turbines controlled at Juno Beach, Florida?

    • “Are Ontario NextEra wind turbines controlled at Juno Beach, Florida?”

      Yes Barbara, they are. So is every NextEra owned turbine in the thumb of Michigan controlled out of Florida.

      • Well this means then, that Ontario wind turbines owned and/or operated by NextEra are controlled in another country.

        And what does this mean for first responders in case of accidents/fires in Canada?

      • The plane was reported missing by a family member and rescue discovered the wreckage at about 3:30 the next morning.

        The alert that there was an impact with a turbine was at 2116:33 the previous evening according to the NTSB report.

        This is information supplied by the NTSB.

      • “And what does this mean for first responders in case of accidents/fires in Canada?”

        If you think about it for a moment, when a mishap takes place, they really don’t know what is happening.
        Example: A turbine starts on fire and they get some sort of message that there is something wrong with turbine #321. They haven’t got a clue what the problem is, just that the computer is telling them something is wrong.

        The public see’s the fire and will report it before the company does. They send a message to their dead bird gatherer to go check out turbine # 321. In the meantime, the public has already reported the incident.

        Make sense?

      • In this N.D. situation there was no one on duty to check the involved IWT.

        A family member reported the plane missing which caused a search & rescue party to be sent out.

        So the plane was down for several hours before the wreckage was found.

        Seems this is what the NTSB report indicates?

        No fire in this accident so public unaware that anything had happened and it was at night?

        Canadian impact incidents reports are in Florida?

Leave a Reply

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