Climate change “solutions” must demonstrate effectiveness

Trillium DinerMEDIA RELEASE 19 December, 2015
Now that a second Auditor General’s Report has severely criticized Ontario’s electricity system, it is time to rethink a politically motivated energy policy. Action on climate change must not squander crucial time and resources on schemes that may be ineffective, economically unfeasible, or harm human health and the environment.

Why did the Government of Ontario choose to ignore the 2011 Auditor General’s Report that questioned the negligible ability of intermittent wind power to lower carbon emissions because natural gas-fuelled back up is required 24/7?

The Multi-municipal Wind Turbine Working Group, made up of councillors from jurisdictions where wind turbine development has been most intensive, is ideally positioned to observe first hand the effects of wind turbines on the local community. Adverse health effects are occurring to citizens exposed to wind turbines at approved setbacks. Noise and health complaints have been ignored by government officials. Restrictive Environmental Review Tribunal procedures under the Ontario Green Energy Act make residents’ participation meaningless. Biologists’ observations of degradation of significant habitat and loss of biodiversity near wind turbines have been disregarded.

Because of wind power’s difficulty in matching production with demand, a substantial amount of the emission-free electricity from hydro and nuclear plants is being dumped (in order to stabilize the grid) because the Government’s energy policy gives priority to nominally “green” wind energy. This results in throwing away a large portion of the “base load” electricity already paid for by consumers.

Our technical consultant, William Palmer, using IESO (Independent Electricity Supply Operator) data, found that in 2014 hydraulic generating stations (water power) were reduced by 3.2 TWh (Terra Watt Hours) due to surplus base load generation. Bruce Power nuclear units were reduced 588 times, each occurrence resulting in bypassing some 300 MW of electrical equivalent of high pressure steam directly to the turbine generator condensers [Read William Palmer’s report here] . These transient adjustments result in accelerated wear on the condensers.

At the same time, much of the excess wind energy has to be sold outside the province at below production cost. This drives down the market price for electricity and means that Ontario is often forced to dump surplus electricity to our neighbours in New York and Michigan at negative prices – paying them to take it, further penalizing Ontario consumers.

The Auditor General’s 2015 report discloses that

  • excess payments to generators over the market price have cost consumers $37 billion between 2006 and 2014
  • are projected to cost another $133 billion from 2015 to 2032
  • electricity consumers will eventually pay a total of $9.2 billion more for renewables under the Min­istry’s guaranteed-price renewable program
  • we are paying double the U.S. average to generators of wind power
  • the electricity portion of hydro bills has risen by 70%.

Not surprisingly the Government has now denied the Auditor General access to Hydro One finances, shielding the company from public scrutiny.

A recently published “Council of Canadian Academies Report: Technology and Policy Options for a Low-emission Energy System in Canada” is an example of policy recommendations that fail to recognize the adverse impact on the existing system that the transition in energy systems is already having. It would have been more useful if its authors had given thoughtful consideration to the IESO data and investigated more fully the consequences of wind turbines in Ontario.

The Multi-municipal Wind Turbine Working Group has written to the Federal Government, which provides substantial subsidies for wind turbines, requesting reality-based climate change policy decisions for solutions that are actually effective in converting to a low emission energy system without themselves resulting in adverse impacts.


Mark Davis, Chair, Multi-municipal Wind Turbine Working Group
Res. (519) 353 5466

19 thoughts on “Climate change “solutions” must demonstrate effectiveness

  1. The Liberals in Ontario have muffled and mislead its citizens enough …every measure helps .” Dalton McGuinty aides charged” . Wynne next? Please tell A.G.Mme Meilleur…NO ONE is above the law ….SIGN THE PETITION.. it is free at

  2. “The Multi-municipal Wind Turbine Working Group has written to the Federal Government, which provides substantial subsidies for wind turbines, requesting reality-based climate change policy decisions for solutions that are actually effective in converting to a low emission energy system without themselves resulting in adverse impacts”.

    Great idea, and while we’re at it, I want to ask the climate change “experts”, the politicians, weather staff and other wannabes, to be more consistent and fair in their predictions and reporting.

    Some examples:

    A few winters ago, Liberal MPP Glen Murray, as Minister of Transportation, twice declared that the Hwy 401 ramps were snowbound due to climate change, not an incompetent tendering process, since apparently rectified.

    David Letterman, wildly waving his arms to accentuate the enormousness of it all, blamed the November 2014 Buffalo snow squall event, which dumped a huge amount of snow on the city, on climate change. Well, all you need for lake effect snow is for the air temperature over the water body to be colder by 13 degrees celsius and for on-shore winds to remain in a constant direction. This was a record waiting to be broken.

    This summer, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley declared that her state received the most rainfall in 2000 years. Maybe so, but show us the records going back to 0015 AD.

    Leonardo DiCaprio, while filming “The Revenant” in Alberta last year, was “terrified” by the “climate change” induced warm winds that suddenly melted all of Calgary’s snow. You’re a good actor Leo, but you need to Google “Chinook Winds”.

    In other news, Vancouver’s so-called climate change-induced drought must be over since the rain just hasn’t stopped in months. In the summer, we were told that the trees blew over in a wind storm because of the dry soil around the roots. Now, we’re being told that the trees are blowing over because of all the wet soil. There’s something blowing, all right. Talk about covering your CC bases.

    Though still early in the season, we were told by (was it by the Weather Network?), that Whistler Ski Resort may not have enough snow to operate this season due to the El Nino effect. As you may have noticed, the resort opened a week sooner than normal and the snow continues to fall unabated.

    There’s no question that California has suffered a catastrophic drought over the last three or four years. You know that because the MSM never stopped telling you about it: the lack of rain, no snow in the mountains, the dry reservoirs, the brown lawns, the forest fires, etc. Yes, all bad news.
    But, why haven’t the same news sources jumped at the chance to give you the good news: its been raining frequently in California lately, the mountains are full of snow pack already this winter season, it was -15 degrees celsius this morning not that far from Los Angeles, and so on?

    The record cold of Ontario’s last two winters was a result of “the Polar Vortex” and “Climate Change”.
    This year’s record warm autumn in parts of Ontario was blamed on “El Nino” and “Global Warming” (long time no hear).

    And one last thing: why do weather reporters (hello the Weather Network!), when the forecast is for record breaking warmth, wring their hands and decry the end of the world due to Global Warming, but while in the depths of a cold spell, keep wishing for nicer, warmer conditions?
    Maybe they’re only human, and maybe sucking and blowing is part of their job requirement, but surely, a little or maybe a lot more honesty from these people would be appreciated.

    Trying to educate the public on ineffective, economically unfeasible and harmful industrial wind turbines is a tough enough job without having to compete with all of the above nonsense.

    Thanks to Mark Davis, Chair, and the Multi-municipal Wind Turbine Working Group.

  3. Wind and Solar are not reducing C02. Ontario’s own Engineering Society is telling us this. See the report, “Ontario’s Electricity Dilemma – Achieving Low Emissions at Reasonable Electricity Rates.” Ontario Society of Professional Engineers (OSPE), April 2015.

    Page 15 of 23. “Why Will Emissions Double as We Add Wind and Solar Plants ?”

    – Wind and Solar require flexible backup generation.

    – Nuclear is too inflexible to backup renewables without expensive engineering changes to the reactors.

    – Flexible electric storage is too expensive at the moment.

    – Consequently natural gas provides the backup for wind and solar in North America.

    – When you add wind and solar you are actually forced to reduce nuclear genera,on to make room for more natural gas generation to provide flexible backup.

    – Ontario currently produces electricity at less than 40 grams of CO2 emissions/kWh.

    – Wind and solar with natural gas backup produces electricity at about 200 grams of CO 2 emissions/kWh. Therefore adding wind and solar to Ontario’s grid drives CO2 emissions higher. From 2016 to 2032 as Ontario phases out nuclear capacity to make room for wind and solar, CO2 emissions will double (2013 LTEP data).

    – In Ontario, with limited economic hydro and expensive storage, it is mathematically impossible to achieve low CO2 emissions at reasonable electricity prices without nuclear generation.

  4. Thank you Mark Davis for this comprehensive assessment. I agree wholeheartedly with insisting that efficacy must be proven.

    I have to seriously wonder why all Municipalities in Ontario aren’t participating with and supporting this Multi-municiple Wind Turbine Working Group.

    Exactly what is holding them back?

    They need to be pressured into taking action to demand an honest cost/benefit analysis.

  5. Dalton McGuinty’s, and now Kathleen Wynne’s, whole basis for installing “green energy”, is that global warming/climate change is real, and needs to be dealt with. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The IPCC (Intn’l Panel on Climage Change) is a farsical group, who have been promoting climate change due to CO2. Ontario shut down coal fired electricity generation to combat pollution. The particulate emissions were already low around Toronto, and CO2 is not a pollutant. Much of the factual science behind this climate change uproar is clearly explained by a Canadian climatologist, Dr. Tim Ball. He has a video, about 2 hours long, that is both enlightening, and entertaining. See it at

    If you accept the science that Dr. Ball presents, you soon see why wind turbines are not only a financial drain on the economy, they are a menace to society. They suck up so much money in subsidies, while providing no benefit to society, environmentally, since they can’t do anything about the climate.

    As an analogy, if we line up all Liberal supporters in the country, shoulder to shoulder, and have them pee into the St. Clair river at the same time, they have no chance of changing the flow, either instantaneously, or long term. That’s how useless it would be to try to alter climate with green energy. The best wind and solar can do, is prolong the fossil fuel supplies a little longer, and they’re not in immediate danger of running out. Yes, eventually they will end, but there’s lots of time to work on alternatives. If all that subsidy money went to R&D, we might come up with future energy supplies, but when it all goes to corporations through our electricity bills, we’ll never see any return on investment.

    Dr. Ball is not on an overzealous crusade to overturn green energy, he merely presents scientific facts so that intelligent people can see both sides of the debate, and like he says in the opening statements, make up your own minds.

    Well worth watching……….

    • Thank you Dave B for this comment! I’m noticing that in all sorts of publications, more and more people are starting to snap out of the brainwashing they’ve have been given and are still being given. This is not an easy process because of cognitive dissonance and the serious disillusionment that occurs when one fully realizes the truth. Survey results showed that Canadians were more brainwashed/propagandized than all western nations. As a result they’ve been able to accept without moral/ethical objection the reality that industrial wind turbines and their infrastructure, in close proximity to people’s homes, such that innocent unconsenting people are being seriously harmed in this experiment, is an absolute necessity. This is so wrong! They’re willing to sit back and watch rural Ontario become uninhabitable because they think that industrial wind turbines will ‘save the planet’.
      Some people have been exposed to alarmism and catastrophic fear mongering their whole lives. Schools are now fully participating in this agenda as well. I feel genuinely sorry for these young people. Instilling high levels of fear is a malevolent tactic used to manipulate people. Doing this to children is abusive.
      Almost every time I turn on CBC I still hear fear mongering.
      This is why I urge people to spend time taking a serious look at sites like or at Judith Curry’s blog. The scientists who participate at these sites tear apart fear- based claims made by MSM and our ‘leaders’ and present the data to prove their point. The rigour of the discussion on these sites is both educational and even at times downright amusing. No one gets away with presenting false information.
      I know some do not want to consider this facet of the turbine issue. So be it. Let them focus on the facet of their preference. In time everyone will see how necessary it is to fully understand that fear- based decision making is behind this debacle and these expensive decisions will create a far worse reality for our children and grandchildren. This agenda must be stopped now.

  6. Wikileaks

    Halifax, Apr.29, 2009, Cable

    ‘Atlantic Canada Energy Update’

    1. Canadian federal government plans to develop an Atlantic energy gateway to the U.S.
    6. Algonquin Power & Emera Inc. partnership.

    There are other cables that mention power going to the U.S.

    Not about climate change but about selling electric power to the U.S.

    This same issue arises in Alberta and Manitoba.

    But the added transmissions lines needed have not been built yet.

    • Reading the leaked cables indicates why the Auditor General’s report was ignored. This is about electric power to be exported to the U.S.

      It appears that the Kingston/PEC area is to be one of the “green” energy hubs in Ontario and close to the U.S. border?

      • WikiLeaks Cable, Jan.25, 2008

        Electric Power From Canada

        Exports to decline:

        Main reason, transmission constraints.
        Permits difficult to obtain in both countries.
        Uncertainty discouraged investments.

        Transmission constraints remain but the permits and investments were obtained, at least in Canada since the date of this cable.

      • The above U.S. cable from Ottawa dated Jan.25, 2008 has Wilkins at the end of the cable.

        Wikipedia: David Wilkins

        U.S. Ambassador to Canada June 29,2005 – January 20, 2009.

        Conformation is helpful in this present power/energy situation.

  7. Illuminati 2016 – How To Kill New World Order And Save The World://

  8. People who can deal with some statistics might find this interesting. People who don’t have a head for statistics can get something too!

    “In the wake of COP21, I thought that it would be interesting to compare the respective pathways of China and the U.S (and others) based on official data. I still plan to post on this topic, but obtaining official data on the pathways proved much more difficult than I anticipated. Leading into the COP21 conference on October 31, 2015, the UNFCCC Secretariat published its “Synthesis report on the aggregate effect of the intended nationally determined contributions”, the terms of reference of which were described as follows::

    quote follows…

    It seems really odd to me that the UNFCCC Synthesis Report did not contain supporting information showing emissions by country. UNEP has a spreadsheet purporting to do so, but unfortunately it contains large plugged values, country errors and does not reconcile immediately to published historical data.
    Nonetheless, it can be used as a basis for comparing the pathways between countries of interest, which I will do in a forthcoming post for China relative to the U.S. and EU, a post in which I’ll consider some of Naomi Oreskes’ attempt to divert attention away from Chinese coal consumption.”

    I have said may times — most of the CO2 data — and quantitative data on its’ effects — is “plugged” — or made up, and now other people are starting to investigate.


    • The Canadian plan is to get BC, Ontario and Quebec, which have the largest populations, on-board and then the rest of Canada will follow suit. And this part of the plan appears to have been completed with the adoption of carbon policies in all three provinces.

      Getting this at the national/federal level is in progress.

Leave a Reply

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