Transport Canada orders wind turbines gone by Dec. 31, 2014

John Norton, Chatham-Kent’s chief legal officer, met as recently as two months ago with Transport Canada officials and proposed that the eight turbines be recognized as “exceptions.” The proposal was based on an aeronautical expert’s advice.

“It’s a simple solution,” the mayor said. “It wouldn’t cost anybody any money . . . it could be easily resolved.”

turbChatham Daily News
Chatham-Kent Mayor Randy Hope finds it ironic that shortly after Transport Canada has ordered the removal of eight turbines near the municipal airport, a C-130 Hercules military aircraft landed there safely for a training exercise.

“How can you have an unsafe airport when you’ve got that type of a plane landing there today,” he said early Sunday evening shortly after the municipality issued a media release about Transport Canada’s position.

The order calling for the removal of the turbines by Dec. 31, 2014 is change from the federal agency originally issuing a letter last year “requesting voluntary compliance.”

The turbines are owned by GDF SUEZ, which is expected to formally object to the order from Transport Canada seeking a hearing before the Minister of Transport through a process in the Aeronautics Act. Read article

6 thoughts on “Transport Canada orders wind turbines gone by Dec. 31, 2014

  1. One still has to be shocked by the gall and entitlement of these wind enthusiasts, This Hope guy believes if one plane can land in a clear day, why couldn’t they any day? There are reasons why Transport Canada declares no fly zones adjacent to airports but this escapes Hope. After building the turbines in the restricted zone he actually calls for Transport Canada to waive their own regulations, or look the other way. Finally some level of authority seems to be standing up to the wind companies. They won’t like it and in the inevitable lawsuit will be looking for the Ont taxpayers municipal or provincial to bail them out of their own arrogance.

  2. One must wonder when a politician who supports a large Wind Developer and then runs for office, how much he/she depends on the developer’s DONATIONS for his/her campaign???

  3. GDF Suez has a complex corporate structure with all of its subsidiaries.
    So are C-K turbines owned by GDF-Suez or are there other companies involved as well?
    For example the C2C Power LP & GDF Suez
    Sorry that it took so many postings to do the C2C Power LP ownerships. Enough to drive everyone up a wall tracking some of these ownerships.

  4. Maybe it took a year for government lawyers to prove the correct chain of ownership so that an order could be issued to remove the C-K turbines?

    You have to know the correct ownership of something to be able to issue an order against the owner/owners.

    • ‘owner[ship]” all connected to the fraudship of triple crownship or I like to call it pirateship. and I also like to leave my citizen[ship] back to the ownership of the crownship

  5. Lol. If I drive home safely after drinking 10 beers then I guess I should be able to do it all the time. They will stall this so long that by the time they move them they will have made enough cash to pay for the relocate. AND start a new 20 year contract elswhere

Leave a Reply

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