Projects

Click to see the most recent list:   http://windpowergrab.wordpress.com/

This list shows the number of industrial (Class 3 or 4) turbines that have been installed in or announced for Ontario.

Numbers are either actual or estimated based on nameplate capacity, assuming 2 MW turbines.

Each of the more than 5,000 turbines listed (above) is as big or bigger than Toronto’s Ex Place turbine (600 kW). Many are more than 4 times as powerful, with rotor diameters (328 feet) that are 8 school bus lengths, heights equal to the length of 12 school buses & concrete foundations that are more than 3,100 square feet (per turbine); not to mention roads, parking lots, lay-down areas, work spaces, transformers, power lines & substations.     Source:  Windpowergrab

21 thoughts on “Projects

  1. Name plate capacity means nothing more than the maximum that could be produced under ideal conditions at a point in time (minus losses associated with operations). The 30% estimated production is a best guess. Production can be a lot lower (down to 0%) depending on age of turbine and point in time or it can be higher. That range from high to low has been realized within an hour or less. The ability of the turbine to capture the kinetic energy from the random acts of the wind makes it so. When standing in a strong wind there are gusts and lulls. The wind turbine is working with that. A lightning bolt has power, lots of it, but is of little value in producing lights on electricity because there is no way to predict when it will strike, where it will strike and then there is the problem of capturing the power. Wind is not much different, though not as much power, location is not a problem, and it can be captured, to a point, but how much power it will produce at any future point in time cannot be done as it is still a random event. Anywhere between 0 and capacity. Nobody knows for sure. The estimated 30% production of power is not an hourly rate. It is not a guaranteed steady state of power. In fact we know it will continue to be variable. Power from industrial wind is the accumulation of bits and pieces of power that sums up to 30% or whatever the true production is for that turbine. That does not make a good generator for a source of electricity.

  2. In fact 30% is basically advertising an not an honest reflection of reality. There are NO turbine sites in Ontario that get to 30%. But even worse, far worse, is the fact that Ontario’s peak needs for electricity come in the summer. And in July and August, wind is at around 10 – 15% capacity.
    Wind, being a totally variable unknown source of electricity has a market value far below that of a dependable source like Hydro or nuclear or nat gas. So the real value of the power is given by the ‘spot’ electricity price at times the wind is blowing. But windy days tend to have low spot prices, due to less demand on a/c. A real analysis would take a engineering student a week or so, but here are some facts:
    We as taxpayers pay $110/Mwh for the power produced at wind turbines. Bruce nuclear makes power for about $40, coal is the same, hydro cheaper, and nat gas about $60 or so. You pay on your electric bill about $50/Mwh. So it seems that wind power would ‘only’ double your electric bill. But really that can’t happen, because you want to have light and heat even on days without wind. Here is the kicker – due to the intermittent nature of wind its real value is at best the spot price for electricity: In May 2009 that was:
    Average Weighted Price for May: $29.14 /MWh (2.91¢/kWh). So say wind makes $29 million worth of power, we taxpayers pay an $81 million dollars extra to the wind companies. But they need more, so they also get huge tax breaks, amounting to at least another $80 million.

    Of course these are big companies – 150 million in profit is not enough – they want to install thousands of these to take BILLIONS of your dollars and put them in their pockets. There are very tight connections between big wind and the liberals (or whatever government is next).

  3. One more thing: The price of electricity in Ontario delivered to your door is about $110/Mwh, and about half of that is the delivery charge by. If wind gets installed to the level that these buffoons want, the delivery charge will go up massively (and there will be more hydro wires all over the countryside) because wind power on a large scale is almost impossible to manage. Or rather almost impossible unless billions are spent on new transmission capabilities.

    Ok – my last point.
    Ontario is NOT in a power emergency. Electrical consumption has dropped by a few percentage points each year for the past three years. This is due to less industry and more careful consumers and businesses. Conservation is the way to go for Ontario – for the next 10 to 20 years. Lets install wind then – if everyone still thinks its a good idea.

    • I agree it is to much of a Price.
      We need to put a stop to this.
      People are getting il.I need help with this.

  4. The cost of industrial wind is not just measured in money out of our pockets but the environment and our peaceful lifestyle and country. To accomplish what the government wants with wind power we will lose most of the peaceful country landscapes, hill tops and lakefront property we have. The sad fact is industrial wind will never provide us with meaningful electricity no matter if we put industrial wind turbines on all available piece of property in Ontario. When the wind is not blowing we have nothing. We cannot afford (money) to build anything else if we go that route that would help us. Who wants that?

  5. WIN TURBINES
    No Benefits – Huge Negative Impact

    Industrial wind turbines will produce only about 25% of their rated capacity. For example, 400 feet high 2 – megawatt (2000 kilowatt) turbine assembly would produce an average of only 25% of its capacity or 500 kilowatts. It will produce that average only a third of the time. It will generate nothing at all and yet draw power from the grid the rest of the time. Because the output is so highly variable and rarely correlates with demand, other sources of energy cannot be taken off line. With the extra burden of balancing the wind energy, those sources may even use more fuel just as cars use more fuel in stop and go city driving.
    The industry is unable to show any evidence that wind power on the grid reduces the use of other fuels. Denmark, despite claims that wind turbines produce 20% of its electricity, has not reduced its use of other fuels because of them.
    Large-scale wind power does not reduce our dependence on other fuels, does not stabilize prices, does not reduce emissions or pollution, and does not mitigate global warming.
    Instead, each turbine assembly requires dozens of acres of clearance and dominates the typically rural or wild landscape where it is sited. Its extreme height, turning rotor blades, strobe/flicker effect, visual dominance, property devaluation, risk to quality of well water, loss of wild life habitat, flashing light night and day,(we can really have “Dark Sky Star Party”) flying ice, health hazard, and much more, ensure intrusiveness far out of proportion to its elusive contribution. Each facility requires new transmission lines infrastructure and new upgraded roads, further degrading the environment and fragmenting habitat. (Where is Bruce Peninsula Environment Group? Do they not have any concerns?)
    Why do utilities support wind turbines?
    Given a choice, most utilities choose to avoid such an unreliable non-dispatchable source. In many places they are required to get a certain percentage of their energy from renewable sources. In other places, they anticipate being required to do so in the near future.
    Ontario utilities do not require showing any benefits (e.g. in terms of emissions) from using renewable sources – they just need to have them on line. In Japan, many utilities limit the amount of wind power that they will accept. In Germany, the grid managers frequently shut down the wind turbines to keep the system stable. In Denmark, most of the energy from wind turbines has to be shunted to pumped hydro facilities in Norway and Sweden.
    Yet wind energy is profitable. Taxpayers cover two-thirds to three-fourths of the cost of erecting giant wind turbines. Governments require utilities to buy the energy, even though it does not effectively displace other sources. In addition, wind companies can sell “renewable energy credits,” or “green tags”, an invention of Enron. They are thus able to sell the same energy twice and allow polluters who buy them to pollute more instead of paying fines. The companies generally cut the local utilities in on some of the easy profits.
    Why do communities support wind turbines?
    Developers typically target poor communities and make deals with individual landowners and the town boards (which are very often the same people) long before anything is made public. With a prospect of adding substantially to the tax rate and or hundreds of thousands of dollars in payoff each year, it is understandable that a lot of people are reluctant to consider the negative impacts. They are willing to ignore the effect of such large machines on themselves and their neighbours. Excited by the financial promises of the wind companies, they forget that their giant machines will destroy precisely what makes their community liveable.

    Don Crosby (The Sun Times) reported (in part) on June 27, 2009.
    PRENEAL Canada has signed an agreement with landowners on the Bruce Peninsula to option several thousand acres of land for the development of a wind farm.
    Glen Estill, a spokesman for the Northern Bruce Peninsula Landowners Committee, confirmed that the local landowners had been approached last fall by various wind developers and felt the community would be well-served if the various options were studied in depth.
    Estill said the project could cost $500 million and include 60-80 turbines. “The PRENEAL proposal was deemed to be the most interesting for both the landowners and the community…we are very enthusiastic about this agreement. We feel we have negotiated a good deal for all the landowners and the community” said Estill.
    Estill said that because of the larger size of newer wind turbines and the long, narrow farms on the Bruce Peninsula, not everyone involved with wind farm will have a turbine on their land. But the agreement allows property owners with a turbine next door to receive a share of the compensation.
    Local people are invited to invest up to 30% of the equity of the project. Landowners who live next door to those who are host to a wind turbine will also share in the benefits even if they don’t have a turbine on their property.
    I don’t understand. Why would landowners be paid for not having a turbine on their property? What is the motive for payment?
    Just to point out, 30% of $500 million is approximately $166.7 million. Is Bruce Peninsula in a position to invest that kind of money?
    To me, this sounds like nothing more than dangling a carrot in front of a rabbit.
    I’m sure that people who are in favour of wind turbines on Bruce Peninsula are well meaning and sincere people. But their argument for the wind turbines reminds me of the man that just had to have a pickle to eat with his sandwich. He would take a bite of his sandwich
    and then a bite of that pickle. Another bite of the sandwich, and then another bite of the pickle followed. His lunch was the sandwich, and that should have been enough for him, but it wasn’t. He always had to have that pickle to make what he called a “complete” meal.
    People favouring wind turbines on Bruce Peninsula are asking for one hell of a big pickle.
    In conclusion, I believe that with no benefits, huge negative impact and billions of taxpayers dollars spent, The Wind Industry is the biggest government subsidized fraud in the history of mankind. I challenge the industry, Premier Dalton McGuinty, Minister of The Environment John Gerretsen, and Minister of Energy George Smitherman, to show us where and how much less of other fuels we are consuming because of the wind turbines.
    We must say “no” to wind turbines on Beautiful Bruce Peninsula.
    Slavko Grguric, Miller Lake

  6. How can people stand by and do nothing when the clear information proves these wind turbines are so unreliable, expensive and dangerous. Why don’t people listen to the facts and rebel? This is so frustrating and depressing. IS THERE HOPE – Can we possibly defeat these developers from poluting our country side. Farmers did not create the problem – why are we being targeted?

    • The Liberals won’t listen because Mike McCawley is making $66,000 a day on wind contracts and David Peterson owns two wind farms.

  7. To slavko grguric ….. you ask “Why would landowners be paid for not having a turbine on their property? What is the motive for payment?”

    Motive you ask. All this means is that the wind developers along with our government are able to put gag orders on more and more of our citizens!

  8. Slavko has indicated no benefit of wind turbines to our grandchildren’s future without oil and natural gas. We can’t store electricity efficiently? Now? In the future? Maybe hydrogen? Maybe not?

    Much of a recent meeting organized by Slavko was about reasonable clearances (2km) of wind turbines from homes, roads and people, efficiencies from 10 to 30% and health. I didn’t here anyone say get rid of them altogether?

    20 years ago in Europe (Germany, Denmark) the same issues were debated. Renewable energy development continues. Even the Alberta Reform Party is jumping on board.

    I am confused. Help me.

  9. Wind has applications, just not as promoted at the industrial scale to be placed on the technology we have developed with our grid. The limitations are too large to overcome and there are no solutions. “Because of wind unreliability, wind technology cannot be depended upon at any level of demand to provide capacity, that is, power on command, which is the definition of unit availability. A random doubling of wind speed from, say, 5 mps to 10 mps increases energy generation from 6% to 73% of rated output. Unlike the highly predictable variations of load, manageable within one percent of forecast [necessary for grid management], wind variations are not manageable because they can’t be forecast within a range that would allow grid operators to plan with specificity how much compensating generation is needed at any given time.” (LESS FOR MORE: THE RUBE GOLDBERG NATURE OF INDUSTRIAL WIND DEVELOPMENT by Jon Boone)
    The extreme variation of wind creates severe limitations in its ability to displace more reliable electricity on the grid. Grid operators have to match electricity used with electricity produced. A highly variable user or input of electricity creates the need to have additional electricity to match the input (in case it disappears) or output required by the user (to cover the electricity required). Obtaining a reliable source of electricity to match the variable input or output creates a number of problems and expenses. The grid operates best if output and input are predictable. The unpredictable random nature of wind makes for expensive inefficiencies on the grid that result in more electricity (bought and paid for) not consumed by customers and necessitates ways to dissipate excess electricity produced when no demand or market is there. That is when curtailment kicks in. No use. No benefit. The industrial wind turbines are more inefficient than could be imagined.

  10. I’ve been in the market for waterfront land(rural residential zoned) on Amerherst Island. I wanted to spend the rest of my life there. Quite frankly the sheer number of news stories that chronicle the negative impact on local residents of similar projects is frightening. I wont procede until this project is scrapped. I would easily pay a premium for that peace of mind. I’m sure I am not the only one. So I think it’s pretty safe to say that property values have already been negatively impacted. How much, is anyones guess.

  11. Just wanted to know. Is this solar farm such a good business. We are about to change our 200 acres farm into solar power panels is this a good idea. Could any one please give me some advise. The company is asking for 50.000.00 to start this project although the fit programme is covering the programme. Thank you very much

    • Have a corporate lawyer go over the contract. Personally I wouldn’t do because it has been know the lease people lie. You may never be able to sell your property in the future and you may be responsilble for dismantling it after your contract.
      Just remember if it is to good to be true it is!!

  12. Sandra:

    Work out how long it takes to pay back the investment.

    If you are not already approved for the FIT program, call the responsible party and ask if new applications are being accepted and at what rate. Also look at the idea of asking you neighbors to pay $800 per MWH when they can currently buy it for $35 — spot rate.

    Do you honestly thing that new governments will honor such a ridiculous payout?

    ..but it is your choice.

  13. Sandra:

    This site has some honest answers about the viability of Solar (my opinion).

    http://www.enviroharvest.ca/electric_solar.htm

    Based on logs developed over the past three years at our area in Ontario at a Latitude of about 450 North we get an annual average of almost 3 3/4 hours of sunlight per day taking into account all of the points listed in the previous paragraph. To get to the point quickly, expect about ONE Hundred kilowatt hours of power per year from a 100W photovoltaic panel. If your usage is only in summer you can expect about 5 usable hours of sunlight daily in our area. Latitude has less to do with available light than environmental conditions. South of us humidity haze and smog reduce productive hours to just over 3 1/2. To the north of us in the Sudbury area they average just under a four hour annual average.

    Work out the numbers…

  14. Does anyone know of any turbines going up in Ontario in the next month? Looking to film turbines being erected and destruction phase.

    Thanks!

  15. Are there still folk who are awake and taking notice who actually believe either industrial wind energy or industrial solar energy can offer a single benefit apart from the profits the individual ‘investor’ will take, paid for by his/her neighbour?
    Come on people, even with today’s technology there is absolutely no credible argument for either wind or solar energy. Even if both worked Ontario energy demand does not need them.
    If the provincial government scrapped both tomorrow, the environmental disaster the present wind projects and solar arrays, both industrial and personal will already leave for our children to clean up, and that is in spite of the economic nightmare, is truly horrendous.
    Do you have any idea of the sheer amount of non-biodegradable materials, including toxins, carcinogens and contaminants, many of which even the two industries themselves don’t have the technology to recycle or dispose of safely, that have been ‘planted’ across rural Ontario in these two new alleged ‘environmentally friendly’ ‘farming’ industries?
    And to the host farmer. Yes I do blame you and all your kind. You did secret deals with wind and solar carpetbaggers without question and accepted gag orders in the contracts you signed. As you signed those contracts the last people you were thinking of were your friends, your neighbours or your community. You weren’t even trying to ‘save the planet’. You were simply greedy.
    Not only are both wind and solar energy nothing but government sponsored criminal scams, but each deliberately brings harm to innocent friends and neighbours who suddenly find their lifelong homes surrounded by IWTs and solar arrays.
    Please, can just one wind or solar proponent come up with a single credible and proven benefit to the province, and to the general public in Ontario, that would justify approving one more single wind turbine or solar panel?
    Andrew Watts

Leave a Reply

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