Drennans bring Notice of Constitutional Question before Superior Court tomorrow

Posted on by

shawn triciaSupport Shawn and Tricia Drennan Tomorrow!

On Wednesday, October 26, 2016 Shawn and Tricia Drennan will bring a Notice of Constitutional Question before the Superior Court at 1 Courthouse Square, Goderich Ontario. Start time is 10:00 a.m. This motion is in regards to the current commercial operation of the K2 Wind Ontario Inc. project and the harm it is inflicting.

Shawn and Tricia will be utilizing the Canadian Constitution Act, 1982, along with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

The Covenants, described above are expressed in Canada under Section 26 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which states:

26. ” The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms
shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other
rights or freedoms that exist in Canada. “

We are requesting your attendance at the hearing as a show of support. Any and all support will be greatly appreciated.

Yours Sincerely,
Shawn & Trish Drennan

120 thoughts on “Drennans bring Notice of Constitutional Question before Superior Court tomorrow”

  1. Many people are looking forward to attending this court case, to support the Drennans. Every person that is able, should make the effort to be there! Shawn and Trish have dedicated a large part of their lives, time, and finances, to fight this travesty, for the benefit of all of us!

    Reply ↓

  2. K2 Wind’s 140 industrial turbines ARE definitely HARMING PEOPLE’S health! The cyclical, pulsating, tonal noise can be heard and felt in homes, resulting in disrupted sleep. K2 Wind has taken away the ability for people to enjoy their own property – inside and out! The entire situation is sickening! We will be there!

    Reply ↓

  3. Good luck friends….. slay this Goliath! !! Slay it for all the suffering the GREED ENERGY ACT is inflicting on innocent people!!!

    Reply ↓

  4. I wish you well with your continued fight. Sorry I can not be in the Court with you this time. I learned a lot during the proceedings in London.

    Reply ↓

  6. The level of heroism demonstrated by this couple has been an inspiration to us all. We can only hope to celebrate their success in finding Justice in a system which promises so much and delivers so little and at what cost…

    Denied our fundamental right to peaceful enjoyment of property we have all measured our strength of character and still fight on.

    Reply ↓

  7. In a country where, according to the Constitution, it’s not OK to upset your neighbours with nasty little words and pissy little insults, it’s perfectly fine to ruin the lives of whole communities with greed energy wind factories in the phony cause of “saving the planet”.

    I still can’t believe we lost in London, especially with Julian Falconer’s expertise.

    Here’s hoping that Shawn and Tricia succeed big time. They deserve it.

    Reply ↓

  8. As others have said, God Speed and prayers for you. I hope you succeed in your valiant efforts.

    OT: BARB or anyone here with facebook?
    (Ella does not do facebook)
    There is an article out of Huron County Michigan with this comment, maybe someone could enlighten this article with a little factual information ?.

    Which reads: Ontario; Canada:) Canada Loves Huron County Farm Land; Because of the (Big Profits) “Canada” has huge land masses, with nothing on them but “Trees & Wind”: So why??? “Do they build there Giant Wind Generators in Huron County???

    link to article:
    http://www.michigansthumb.com/news/articleComments/Broken-blades-10185020.php

    Reply ↓

    • Included in the whole picture is the’ President’ Clean Energy Plan’ which includes Canada by agreement.

      Cross-border electricity production/ trade is included under NAFTA.

      Any Canadian company that produces electricity in the U.S. is included in NAFTA and vice-versa.

      So a Canadian company producing electricity in the U.S. can sue under NAFTA if contract problems arise.

      The most desirable places to install wind and solar are the closest to large population centres such as the Detroit metro area and not in the Canadian “wilderness”. The greater the distance from large population centres the greater the transmission costs are.

      Coal power will be phased out in Michigan. So there is a big push on by environmental groups to go directly to renewables. And this hits the Michigan Thumb area very hard.

      Michigan faces a power shortfall by the middle of 2017 or by early 2018. Rush to get IWTs installed.

      Maybe the fellow who wrote the comment about the above article doesn’t know the whole picture?

      Reply ↓

      • We have a ‘ President’ ?
        No, Say it ain’t so !………

        I see this guy commenting quite often. I don’t think he knows anything about turbines in Canada, and yet we are all so close to each other, ‘realistically’.
        We are already feeling the effects here in the thumb. Last two years, we’ve had several outages. More than we’ve had in the 30 years I’ve lived in my home.
        Now, we must keep an ample amount of gasoline around for that generator, it gets awfully cold, starting like now.

  9. ( driven crazy by the use of ‘there’ instead of ‘their’ )
    what has happened to education !

    Reply ↓

    • It’s called “television”.

      Children who have been habituated to passive “entertainment” in front of a TV set for 4 years of their lives before being introduced to active learning in a class room need a lot of TLC in order to enjoy and revel in using their brains.

      Thanks to god that there are such early learning professionals; god bless them all.

      Reply ↓

      • Hi Johana, maybe I didn’t make myself clear, which is very possible, I detest computer communication, in general because I am not good at it.
        The guy commenting in the article I mentioned, his avatar or whatever you call it, he’s an adult out of Delta College, in Baycity Mi.
        He should know better.
        Sorry, but I do disagree with you, because my adult son spent a lot of time watching various things on tv. Simply because I could not teach him anymore. He was well advanced entering Kindergarten. It was the teachers that LACKED teaching the difference between ‘there’ their’ they’re, ect. As he was advancing from high school to college, I had to correct his spellings! Even after College I found myself correcting words he wrote.
        when you have to tell your adult kid that ‘bored’ and ‘board’ re two different words with two different meanings, it tells me that these ‘new wave teachers’ aren’t to bright.

      • And let me add this, He does listen, because as I’ve explained to him during these times when he makes these mistakes:
        You need to make sure you’re using the correct spelling, or else you make yourself look like you couldn’t handle that promotion at work, simply because you are using the wrong spelling for a word.
        ( And we talking about a straight A’s in High School and College, Deans List and all that, hired for a major corporation two months before graduation )
        Yes, I am a proud mother.

  11. Congratulations to your son for making such superior educational milestones in spite of spending a lot of time watching tv.

    I might say he is the exception rather than the rule; would you agree?

    Reply ↓

    • I would agree.
      It’s more of what you allow them to watch, rather than sitting them in front of something.

      Reply ↓

      • Johana, this really isn’t the place for this conversation.
        I was curious though, as to why a comment from me about spelling, was met with a reply from you concerning the use of television.
        I just don’t see the connect between tv, and teachers lacking in teaching proper English, especially spelling.

        Thank You God, for sure, for being able to make sure I taught my children, ‘ that teacher is wrong’ and here’s why.
        And of course, it’s not all teachers !

    • Two items now proven:

      A NAFTA lawsuit can be won by a renewable energy company against Canada.

      Both Hydro Manitoba and Hydro Quebec now have power supply deals with U.S. states. Did Ontario try to get/buy clean hydro from either province instead of bringing in renewable energy companies into Ontario?

      Reply ↓

      • Last week Ontario announced they are working on a program to import Hydro from Quebec. But why… you might ask, when the announced ( when they cancelled the LRP2) that Ontario has enough Hydro for the next 10 years.

      • If Ontario shut down or curtailed U.S. IWT companies power production without doing the same to Canadian IWT companies, could Canada be sued under NAFTA for unfair treatment?

    • RED FLAG ALERT!!!

      “Dozens of energy projects referred to DOJ”
      31 October 2016 | Portland Tribune | Claire Withycombe

      SALEM – Wind, solar and ethanol projects were among the dozens of renewable energy projects referred for investigation to the Oregon Department of Justice by auditors of a discontinued state tax credit program, according to a list released Friday.

      The list was compiled by Marsh Minick, P.C., a private firm that conducted an audit of the Department of Energy’s Business Energy Tax Credit (BETC) program under contract with the Oregon Secretary of State’s Office.

      That audit was released in early September.

      Auditors didn’t find “direct evidence” of fraud, they wrote in their audit report, but said they found “circumstantial evidence” suggesting suspicious activity in a number of BETC projects.

      According to the documents listing those projects, there were several projects that exceeded limits on eligible costs.

      Oregon statutes limited eligible costs to $20 million per renewable energy facility per year.

      Representatives of two groups identified as having projects exceeding eligible costs in the report, Klondike Wind Power and Pacific Ethanol, on Friday defended the projects that received the tax credits.

      Klondike Wind Power, known as PPM Energy, Inc., later becoming Iberdrola Renewables, Inc., which then was renamed Avangrid Renewables, had four projects. According to the report, each of them were treated as distinct facilities, qualifying them to receive four times the eligible costs.

      Art Sasse, a spokesman for Avangrid Renewables, said the following about the Klondike Wind Power projects in a statement late Friday:

      “We’re happy to work with the DOJ to show that we followed both the letter and spirit of the law whenever we utilized the BETC. We built four distinctively different wind farms at our Klondike complex, with each phase of construction representing a different time frame, with placed in service dates that are years apart, with various models of turbines and different customers for each wind farm.”

      Pacific Ethanol had two project files in Boardman, Ore., one for ethanol production, and another for ethanol distribution, according to the report.

      The auditors noted that the two projects had “similar yet different names,” were located at the same site address and had the same applicant. Those factors raised “red flags” under state administrative rules.

      Together the projects had eligible costs totaling $29 million, according to the auditors’ report, exceeding the $20 million limit.

      Paul Koehler, a spokesman for Pacific Ethanol, said that the Boardman plants continue to operate.

      “I think the Boardman, Ore., ethanol project is a very good example of the use of the Business Energy Tax Credit,” Koehler said.

      Cascade Grain Products, Willow Creek Energy and the Portland General Electric Company were also identified as companies with a project or projects that exceeded eligible costs.

      Media representatives of these three companies – or companies that subsequently acquired them – could not be immediately reached for comment late Friday.

      Cascade Grain Products had two projects: an ethanol production facility and an ethanol distribution facility.

      Willow Creek Energy, a subsidiary of Invenergy LLC, had a project that was approved for a tax credit with eligible costs of $22 million, as did Portland General Electric. The specific nature of these projects was not identified in the auditors’ report.

      Solar World AG had two projects that exceeded eligible costs. Those two projects had originated as five projects, according to the report. The five original projects were merged into two.

      A spokesman, Ben Santarris, said that his company operates according to the “highest ethical and legal standards.”

      Auditors stated that in emails, state officials agreed to approve eligible costs that differed from what was permitted under state statute.

      The auditors also identified several “projects of concern” in the list released Friday by DOJ, but noted that its list of “concerning” projects was not comprehensive.

      “Due to the volume of projects where red-flag activity was observed, investigative efforts were motivated by perceived risks,” the auditors wrote. “This should not be considered a comprehensive list or a complete investigation.”

      https://www.wind-watch.org/news/2016/11/01/dozens-of-energy-projects-referred-to-doj/
      http://portlandtribune.com/pt/9-news/329950-209729-dozens-of-energy-projects-referred-to-doj

      Reply ↓

      • “AIM PowerGen Commissions Projects Under Ontario’s Renewable Energy Standard Energy Offer Program”
        CanWEA news release, July 18, 2008
        http://www.canwea.ca/media/release/release_f.php?newsId=28

        Toronto, Canada – AIM PowerGen Corp. (AIM) announced today the commissioning of the Frogmore and Cultus wind farms. The projects, developed under Ontario’s Renewable Energy Standard Offer Program, each have a total installed capacity of 9.9 megawatts (MW) and will produce enough power to supply 3,000 average households for one year.

        AIM PowerGen CEO Mike Crawley commented that these projects are among the first to be built under the Standard Offer Program. “We are pleased that Frogmore and Cultus wind farms are now on-line and providing clean, renewable energy to the province. The Standard Offer program was a ground-breaking initiative for the province and has allowed smaller projects such as these to be competitive and developed to support Ontario’s evolving energy system.”

        The wind farms, located in Norfolk County on the northern shore of Lake Erie, are each comprised of six Vestas V82 1.65 MW turbines.

      • ReNew Canada
        “Forecast: High Winds” by Mira Shenker
        http://renewcanada.net/2008/forecast-high-winds/

        ‘[excerpt] The idea behind the standard offer was to encourage local communities to put together ten megawatt projects. The OPA provides small electricity generators (from residential photovoltaic rooftop generation of one kilowatt up to small wind farms of ten megawatts) with a standard pricing regime. John Kourtoff, president of Toronto’s Trillium Power Wind Corporation says, “The SOP is very good, but it’s been abused by the industry. It was meant for community power, but developers chopped big projects up into smaller, ten megawatt parcels.”’

    • Legal Limbo

      https://saugeenshores.civicweb.net/FileStorage/01B0AA35CB8D4ACF9F4CFC2F3B187D80-Ombudsman%20UNIFOR%20Wind%20Turbine.pdf

      ‘[excerpt] Town of Saugeen Shores
      600 Tomlinson Drive, P.O. Box 820
      Port Elgin, ON N0H 2C0

      November 8, 2016

      Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario
      Bell Trinity Square
      483 Bay Street, 10th Floor, South Tower
      Toronto, Ontario
      M5G 2C9

      Dear Mr. Paul Dubé:

      The Town of Saugeen Shores asks your office to investigate the ongoing failure of the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) to verify that an industrial wind turbine in our community is operating in compliance with the ministry’s own regulations.
      […]
      Also recovered, as part of the same Freedom of Information request, were records of noise monitoring undertaken by MOECC in response to the public complaints. A number of those records show monitoring results which may indicate that the turbine was producing noise emissions in excess of what is allowable under the Certificate of Approval issued for its operation by MOECC.
      On February 3, 2016 representatives of the Town met with local MOECC officials to discuss these troubling noise monitoring results. MOECC representatives advised that the complaints driven noise monitoring results do not prove conclusively that the turbine was operating out of compliance. However, they also advised that no acoustic audit or test has ever been done that would determine, conclusively whether or not the turbine has been continually operating in compliance with the MOECC’s Noise Guideline for Wind Turbines or the Certificate of Approval.
      […]
      More broadly, it is possible that the situation affecting our community may be indicative of a larger failure within the MOECC to fulfillits role in regulating and overseeing the operation of industrial wind turbines in the Province of Ontario. The fact that the MOECC may be unable or unwilling to ensure that industrial wind turbines achieve full regulatory compliance should merit a detailed investigation by your office into this matter.’

      Reply ↓

    • Ontario Health Protection and Promotion Act
      https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h07

      Part III Community Health Protection

      “Complaint re health hazard related to occupational or environmental health
      11. (1) Where a complaint is made to a board of health or a medical officer of health that a health hazard related to occupational or environmental health exists in the health unit served by the board of health or the medical officer of health, the medical officer of health shall notify the ministry of the Government of Ontario that has primary responsibility in the matter and, in consultation with the ministry, the medical officer of health shall investigate the complaint to determine whether the health hazard exists or does not exist.”

      Reply ↓

      • This information is very affirming that the level of protection, expected by residents in Huron County, is stated clearly in the Ontario Health Protection and Promotion Act.
        After sending so many complaints about the annoyance being experienced from audible noise, and the frightening sensations and symptoms being experienced from low frequency noise modulations and infrasound radiation, these residents fully expected that all who were/are responsible for their harm, to take action immediately to protect them!
        Instead, they had to endure being almost completely ignored! The bungling efforts of the MOECC to capture audible noise being reported to them were the cause of even further annoyance. The MOECC office is two hours away and scheduling visits from their officers seemed like a bureaucratic tactic. Their arrival to the scene, more often than not, was at a time when the noise had subsided due to changed atmospheric conditions and wind speeds.
        When long term, on site noise monitoring was finally arranged by the MOECC, these residents were told that the noise measurements were invalid because the MOECC did not have tall enough equipment to measure the wind speed and thus the weather conditions did not match the conditions recorded at the office in Mississauga!
        The harm these residents were experiencing and reporting went on and on and is still occurring to this day!
        This is wrong! These people deserve protection!

    • “Chief Medical Officer of Health of Ontario document identifies causal link”
      Google: “fess up or delete”

      On May 20, 2010, the Chief Medical Officer of Health of Ontario (CMOH) released “The Potential Health Impact of Wind Turbines”. This CMOH report was distributed to the general public.

      In conjunction with this release, CMOH prepared a document to address anticipated questions related to the CMOH “The Potential Health Impact of Wind Turbines” (“the CMOH Q & A document”). Unlike “The Potential Health Impact of Wind Turbines” the CMOH Q & A document was not distributed to the general public.

      A draft version of the CMOH Q & A document was obtained through an Ontario Freedom of Information Request. The draft CMOH Q & A document contains comments which reveal the CMOH research team knew that a causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects existed.

      Dr. Ray Copes is identified as one of the contributors to the CMOH “The Potential Health Impact of Wind Turbines”. Dr. Copes is the Director, Environmental and Occupational Health Branch, Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion.

      In a May 11, 2010 email Dr. Copes provided his comments/suggestions to lead author of the CMOH Q & A document that was being prepared for Medical Officers of Health province wide.

      The May 11, 2010 email included a draft version of the CMOH Q & A document. This draft version contained comments from Dr. Copes, shown using the “track changes” function.

      The first question in the CMOH Q & A document posed:
      “1. What scientifc evidence is available on the potential health impacts of wind turbines?”

      The suggested response was indicated:
      “A few case studies and cross-sectional studies in people living near wind turbines were published in the literature. The scientific evidence available to date, however, does not demonstrate any causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.”

      Dr. Copes’s track changes comment was provided. He wrote:
      “Should add ‘direct’ as the studies would support a link through ‘annoyance'”

      The May 19, 2010 version of the CMOH Q & A was changed to add the word “direct”:
      “A few case studies and cross-sectional studies in people living near wind turbines were published in the literature. The scientific evidence available to date, however, does not demonstrate any direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.”

      (A 2009 literature review coauthored by Dr. Copes reports wind turbine noise annoyance and sleep disturbance is common between 30 and 45 dBA.)

      Another question posed in the CMOH Q & A document was:
      “8. Your report says “scientific evidence available to date does not show a direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.” Are there any indirect links?

      The draft version proposed the response:
      “This statement means that exposure to wind turbine noise does not cause any adverse health effects. There are no known indirect links.”

      The track changes comment reveals that Dr. Copes knew otherwise. Dr. Copes advised:
      “Not really true. The link between perceived noise and symptoms is probably linked to annoyance. The link with annoyance should be recognized.”

      The next question posed in the CMOH Q & A document:
      “9. Your research refers to “some people living near wind turbines reporting symptoms such as dizziness, headaches and sleep disturbance.” If not attributable to the effect of wind turbines, what do you think is causing these health conditions?”

      The proposed response in the draft document:
      “Although some people living near wind turbines report symptoms such as dizziness, headaches, and sleep disturbance, available scientific evidence does not demonstrate a causal link to wind turbine noise. As many factors can trigger these non-specific symptoms, people should consult with their physician about possible causes.”

      Dr. Copes commented:
      “This answer isn’t credible. Either ‘fess up to the annoyance link or delete.”

      Reply ↓

    • “Local Medical Officer of Health says no further study required of wind turbines in this area”
      Port Dover Maple Leaf | David Judd | May 6, 2015

      There’s no proof that industrial wind turbines cause serious harm to health, says Haldimand-Norfolk’s medical officer of health.

      Dr. Malcolm Lock sympathizes with people who complain about sleep deprivation and other ailments.

      But science doesn’t support turbines as the cause, Dr. Lock said in an interview.
      […]
      Dr. Lock in a seven-page report to Haldimand-Norfolk’s board of health on April 24 noted:
      – In 2009, Ontario’s chief medical officer of health stated there was no scientific evidence showing turbine noise causes adverse health effects.
      – In 2010, the chief medical officer of health said there was no evidence that vibration from low-frequency turbine noise causes adverse health effects.
      – In 2012, the Ministry of Environment said regular inspections of turbines in the Cultus, Clear Creek and Frogmore areas found no significant environmental issues with wind turbines.

      Many places in Ontario have more noise than near wind farms, Dr. Lock said in his report.

      Annoyance is subjective, he said.

      For example, sounds of a rock concert or car race would be pleasurable to some people but painfully unpleasant to others.

      Dr. Lock’s report determined “at a local level, within this health unit and based upon the current state of scientific knowledge, no further investigations related to this topic are indicated or warranted at this time.”

      Reply ↓

      • But rock concerts and car races are are short term noise producers.

        Interesting that the timeline appears to begin in 2009 when the green energy act was enacted?

        And the current state of scientific knowledge? The effects of lack of sleep have been known for quite a long time.

      • The time line in the Clear Creek/Cultus/Frogmore IWT ZONE begins in 2005 when the community first learned about the AIM PowerGen project and presented multiples of objections to Norfolk Council citing that the 66 turbines strung in a line along the north shore of Lake Erie from Elgin Cty east to Clear Creek would be a wall of whirling, industrial cuisinarts in the path of both the Atlantic and Mississippi Flyways for thousands of migrating birds.

        Unfortunately, there were no birders on Council nor in the community who would take action to STOP THESE THINGS.

        On the other hand, we now DO HAVE the plumpest, sleekest coyotes in southwestern Ontario where before they were mangy and scrawny.

      • Barbara, your comment above about people being reluctant to report/complain is correct. Though there is no evidence, to my knowledge of anyone being “put-down”, there is plenty of evidence of people being completely ignored.
        Even when they made calls to the MOECC SPILL hotline in the middle of the night because they woke up frightened with what they were experiencing, the person on the end of the line merely noted their ‘complaint’ and could not contact anyone to turn off the turbines near their home.
        This is abuse upon abuse! And it’s still happening!
        Who would have ever expected this in Ontario, Canada?

      • NIMBY is now the number one word in the lexicon of wind dicks and land / housing / condo developers, and as Barbara pointed out, is used to put down anyone that disagrees with their intent to reap millions of $$$ from whatever they choose to foist on the public, regardless of merit.

        Don’t believe me?
        Google Bryan Tuckey, president and CEO of Building Industry and Land Development (BILD) and NIMBY .
        See what comes up.

      • There is plenty of evidence that victims in Norfolk County, Ontario have been systematically “put-down” by authorities, neighbours, family and other ignorant people who are incapable of understanding scientific detail and or don’t know the difference between right wrong or don’t care.

        Even in the title of the article that began this thread, Norfolk County’s “Local Medical Officer of Health says no further study required of wind turbines in this area” is an example of an act that aims to put-down the victims.

        These are “aggravating factors.”

        Understand that in Clear Creek, Norfolk County, Vestas 1.65-megawatt turbines that became operational in 2008 were built 400 metres (and closer) to homes that have since been abandonned.

        Mike Crawley & company, who are causing this tragedy, claim they are not responsible.

        In 2011, Vestas advised some people (but not all) that its 1.65-MW turbines were emitting sound that is much louder than what had been used in noise models.

        For the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, this doesn’t matter. Despite a compliance monitoring programme that has spanned 8-years and counting, the MOE has been unable and or unwilling and unable to ascertain non-compliance, NOR compliance.

        How can a project be neither compliant nor non-compliant from the perspective of the regulator? It’s a logical fallacy, to say the least.

        Nevertheless, the MOE has gone on to issue approvals for new projects, like those in Sommer’s community, while proving they are incapable of regulating projects in Clear Creek.

        The “bungling efforts” that Sommer describes may very well be intentional, crossing the line into the criminal. It’s no accident; it’s a sophisticated cover-up.

        That the local medical officer of health, so-called “Doctor” Malcolm S. Lock hasn’t addressed this, implicates him in what may constitute the biggest, most corrupt disaster ever to happen in this neck of the woods.

      • In the 2010 Report who were the members of the ” Council of Medical Officers of Health”? Does anyone know?

  13. LRP2 is not cancelled…. just put on hold till the liberals settle everyone down and buy the next ellection…. then they will fire up the LRP2 again much to everyone’s surprise…..

    Reply ↓

    • FYI: Essex County, ON

      The above quake maps shows two magnitude 3 quakes offshore in Lake Erie where an IWT offshore project has been proposed.

      Check out the above NRC map.

      Reply ↓

      • On this webpage select SGL/Southern Great Lakes.
        Then the maps go all the way in sections to the east coast.

        This is what is named the St. Lawrence Fault Line.

        Had course in Oceanography which dealt with ocean floors, trenches, fault lines, Tsunamis, ocean currents but mostly concentrated on the fault lines off the west coast.

    • Court documents that were previously submitted, need to have changes made. Some issues will be stricken, and others will be added. New names will be added to the list of defendants, as well.
      Shawn and Trish have to try to do as much of this on their own as possible, to keep costs down.

      Reply ↓

      • So, all Wind Warriors need to support Shawn and Trish with the COSTS of this court case.

        On their behalf, I have finally researched their correct postal address [they did not ask me to do this; I just thought this was a way to help even if you couldn’t be there in person]:

        Shawn & Tricia Drennan
        RR #7
        Lucknow ON
        N0G2H0

      • Johana, your action is a refreshing gesture of compassion and empathy!

    • If Mr. Trump does not win tomorrow, expect thousands more turbines speared into our grounds with no recourse to stop them.
      It will be a sad day for The United States, and Canada will be beside us with the same fate.

      Reply ↓

      • The economies of both countries have to be taken down or limited for sustainability goals and CO2 emissions reductions to take place. Then add CO2 taxes to the mix.

        How many more manufacturing companies will close or leave?

        Look what happened in South Australia where looked good ” on paper” green energy met the forces of mother nature.

        Didn’t take long to take out the power grid there.

      • GM just announced on the 10th, 2000 jobs will be cut in Michigan and Ohio.
        funny that, eh? just after Trump won.
        Now is the time to keep the fire burning bright, keep fighting.
        Did you see that Vesta’s just declared bankruptcy?

      • Don’t think the election results were expected and corporate plans are made well in advance.

        While Washington state voted Democratic, the carbon tax ballot Initiative 732 was voted down there. Washington would have been the first U.S. state with a carbon tax.

        Party doesn’t matter when it comes to carbon taxes if people get to vote on this issue?

  19. NY Times, Nov.9, 2016, Washington state, U.S.

    Initiative 732: ‘Create Carbon Emission Tax’

    With 69% precincts reporting:

    No – 58.9%
    Yes – 41.1%

    The final vote numbers may be out sometime tomorrow.

    Reply ↓

      • Presently, Tuscola County is trying to veer off Nextera, they are busy focusing on a brake system.

        Spicer Engineering, which constructed wind ordinances for Huron County, Tuscola County, ( may be more) all of a sudden is doing baby back steps with a different representative speaking for the company.( I have not heard this name presented before from Spicer)
        The quote below is from Tuscola County Advertiser paper, and the article

        https://www.wind-watch.org/news/2016/11/14/more-questions-than-answers-prompt-delay-in-almer-wind-turbine-decision/

        “””” It began at 7 p.m. and continued beyond 10 p.m., when planning commission chairman Robert Braehm moved to table any further action due to time limitations – but not before Alan Bean, an engineer with Spicer Group pointed out many deficiencies with the application for Tuscola III.

        “Just so you understand, we work for the Almer Township planning commission and it is our job to report to them,” Bean said. “They’ve had our staff report for a couple of days. This is a public hearing. We think it’s helpful that the public understand that we’ve gone through it, and that we communicate to you…that there are aspects of the application that are still needed.”””

        For months, the concerned group of Ellington and Almer Twp. have been battling Nextera, The Back pages of the paper have been filled with constant advertising for months, from community members. Wish I could show them to you. This last one was exceptional.

      • Pass the AMA information on so that those who will be affected by IWTs will know the situation they will be facing.

        Now some in the Michigan legislature want 15% renewables with increasing amounts over time as well.

        Don’t these people ever look at the facts!

      • Hopefully, that 15% ‘want’ is dead in the water.

        The election of Donald Trump as the next president of the United States and the GOP maintaining control of the U.S. House and Senate means the key reason for pushing forward with Senate Bill 437, a bill that will revise utility regulations in Michigan, has effectively gone away.

        One primary reason supporters of SB 437 give for it is “system reliability.” They explain that the need to address alleged shortfalls in Michigan’s electricity supply effectively forces their hands. However, that argument is based largely on the existence of federal regulations, such as the Clean Power Plan and the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard, which have mandated an artificial timeline for closing existing coal plants.

        With the presidential election now decided, the regulatory mandates to close those plants will likely die, or at the very least significantly change. Given these changes, we should recognize there is now no pressing need to impose bills like SB 437 onto the population of Michigan.

        Simply put, it’s time for people who are pushing for their passage to stop

        http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/22976

  22. Ella: You have posted some interesting links, but I think the only people that are seeing them, are those that commented on the original announcement about the constitutional hearing. It is time to start another thread, so everyone will see them.

    Reply ↓

    • Hi Yvonne, I got a little chuckle out of your suggestion.
      Barb is WAY more talented at sluthing and finding information.
      Besides, it isn’t my site. I’m here because I only ever wanted to join forces with Ontario.
      I’ve said it since 2012, Americans on One Side, Canadians, on the other side of our international bridges, Port Huron would be the one to pummel with civil obedient protest. We ARE in this together, You lose and So do I. Together we have a much better chance at informing the public if we work together.

      Reply ↓

  25. FYI for you Barb, Tuscola County Mich, Almer and Ellington Twps. just did a good slap on Nextera, slap, slap, and slapped hard !
    Hoping the momentum keeps going.

    Reply ↓

      • Ella: For your entertainment

        Peninsula Daily News, Port Angeles, Washington, Dec.9, 2016

        ‘Numbers vary on turbine electrical generation: Intent not power production, Port Angeles city says’

        3 small turbines cost about $100,000 with now est. power production of $42-$57 a month.

        Salt spray is also an issue with this project.

        Scroll down & read at:

        http://www.peninsuladailynews.com

    • For general information:

      ‘Port Angeles Landing Mall’, Washington state.

      50 kWh bank of Lithium-ion batteries and decommissioned July 2013

      The unit experienced a fire in July 2013.

      Research Description: Smart grid and peak load reductions.

      More information online on the fire from Port Angeles news sources.

      http://www.energystorageexchange.org/projects/71

      Reply ↓

      • Ella: FYI

        DOE Global Energy Storage Database

        Tehachapi Wind Energy Storage Project, California

        Commissioned July 1, 2014

        8,000 kW
        Duration at Rated Power: 4 hrs
        Cost ~ $50 million
        DOE funding ~ $25 million

        http://www.energystorageexchange.org/projects/8

        This data base is worldwide. Use ‘United States’ and select a state for storage projects in the menu.

        An example of wind energy storage cost.

      • Ella: FYI

        DOE Global Energy Storage Database

        ‘DTE Community Energy Storage for Grid Support-monroe Community College-CES’

        Commissioned Feb.22, 2011

        Lithium-ion Battery
        500 kW Solar array
        Duration at Rated Power: 30 min.
        Cost ~ $11 million
        DOE ARRA grant ~ $5 million

        Also see: Related Community Project

        http://www.energystorageexchange.org/projects/114

        Don’t think the public knows how expensive power storage is.

    • It’s OK to ignore Environment Canada and Natural Resources Canada databases which have historic and current Ontario data/information?

      Reply ↓

Leave a Reply

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