TBayTel Green Tec Recycling Event 2013
Badanai-October
Framing & Art Center
Brand New You
Stride Orthopaedics & Footwear
T Bay Telephone
News
Click here to see more
Subscribe
Community Calendar
Click here for full listings.
Poll
Polls are not available.
Polls are not available.
View Results Past Polls

Market Research

Do you own your own home?
Who's Modo
User Submitted Photo Gallery
Submit Your Own Photos
2010-10-08 at MIDNIGHT

Turbines OKed

By Leith Dunick, tbnewswatch.com
Brake Repairs! Front Ends! Mufflers! Shocks!Not just mufflers - MINUTE MUFFLER, 677 Memorial Avenue. Open Monday-Saturday. Email: tminutemuffler@shaw.caClick here for details.
Irene Bond isn’t surprised that municipal administration has recommended city council approve Horizon Wind’s application to build an 18-turbine wind farm on city property.

Bond, spokeswoman for the Nor’Wester Mountain Escarpment Protection Committee, said her group will make one last plea to council on Tuesday night, trying to convince them to vote down the lease and location agreement ahead of an expected vote at special Committtee of the Whole meeting later that night.

"We hope to have a second sober thought here and provide that so that councillors can reconsider," said Bond, a day after the city released a 12-page report outlining its position on the project, while at the same acknowledging the threat of lawsuits from "several parties" and stressing the decision is in no way being rushed through in advance of the Oct. 25 municipal election.

Bond isn’t holding her breath that they’ll be able to sway anyone to change their vote, though she hasn’t given up entirely.

"I’m hopeful," she said.

Neebing Coun. Linda Rydholm is expected to vote against the project, while outgoing McKellar Coun. Robert Tuchenhagen told Dougall Media on Friday he will vote in favour of it on Tuesday.

"I expect to support the wind farm," Tuchenhagen wrote in an email, when asked how he plans to vote.

Coun. Aldo Ruberto said he has yet to make up his mind.

"I will wait until Tuesday to decide," he shared via email. "I’m going over the report in fine detail to see if I’ve missed anything."

At large Coun. Iain Angus said he too will wait for Tuesday to make a decision.

The rest of council, with the exception of at-large Coun. Larry Hebert, was also polled, but none immediately responded Friday afternoon.

Hebert will declare a conflict, as he is involved with an energy consulting firm.

Bond said if not this council, perhaps the next might reconsider, an option left open to council on any decision it makes.

"It frightens me that we’re allowing administration, the same people who got us into this, to continue with this. You don’t make a bad decision and then keep making bad decisions. Let another group see this and investigate it and go from there."

The public report, produced in three days by city after council asked for it on Monday night, outlines a lease agreement for 18 turbines, with provisions for a dozen more at a later date. The reports suggests council should consider capping the number and size of the turbines and provides the city security that Horizon will set aside money to cover the decommissioning costs when the turbines’ lifespan is reached.

In her report Evans says administration doesn’t feel the approval has been rushed, as opponents claim, stating the first request by Horizon for approval was in March and the lease format request followed two months later.

"These matters have been considered by Committee of the Whole on several occasions," Evans writes. "It is administration’s opinion that all information relevant and necessary to the decision-making process has been obtained and thoroughly and properly reviewed."

Bond, however, suggested Horizon has not responded to 16 comments made by the city in relation to the company’s provincially mandated renewable energy approval, which has yet to be filed with the ministry of natural resources and without which the project cannot go ahead under the Green Energy Act.

City manager Tim Commisso encouraged the public to take time to read the entire 12-page report, and said by no means is it a done deal, even if council follows administration’s recommendation and votes to lease the land to Horizon and approve the turbine locations.

"(The report) acknowledges that there are a number of other requirements really for this project to move forward and we’ve outlined those in the report – certainly the REA approval and things like First Nations consultation."

Council on Tuesday will receive a report in closed session from Dillon Consulting outlining the full economic impact of potentially relocating some of the turbines.

"That report will be confidential because it contains commercially sensitive information," Commisso said.

Commisso would not comment when asked if Horizon has a lawsuit filed or ready to file a breach of contract suit should city council vote no.

A source close to the Nor’Wester Mountain Escarpment Protection Committee told Dougall Media on Friday he expects the opposition group will have a lawyer hired by day’s end and a lawsuit would more than likely be forthcoming if the wind farm is allowed to go ahead.

A breach of contract lawsuit, if lost, would be paid out of the city treasury, not through insurance.
Neebing Ward residents have cited diminished property values, health issues and peril to endangered species as reasons for opposing the project.

The project, when first unveiled to council in 2007, had the turbines located south of Big Thunder Sports Park, but when the province turned down the site, the two sides agreed on the current placement.

Click here to submit a letter to the editor.
iCar

Click here to report a typo or error

Tbnewswatch.com(117)

Comments

We've improved our comment system.
One Mans Opinion says:
It is unfortunate that the city has been run as if people don't exist. Corporate mentallity at its finest. In future, this would be a good example as to why people should pay attention to what is going on in their community, province and country. Something that is just not happening until it is too late. Having blind faith in politicians is dangerous. 38% voter turn out in last municipal election. See the result?
10/8/2010 7:05:40 AM
Rick says:
MOST interesting will it be to see what kind of SPIN the newbies running for city council and the mayors chair will put out there.
Tbnewswatch.com

10/8/2010 7:18:34 AM
tiredofit says:
Nothing more than a bunch of scared rats afraid of being sued by Horizon and that's all this boils down too. Well, hate to break it to you folks, your still being sued, but as the city lawyer stated, it's the lessor of the two evils (nice how they refer to the residents as "EVIL")

What most failed to realize is Horizon can sue the Corporation of the City of Thunder Bay as can the residents, however we the residents can also sue the members of council as well for a variety of things (did Roselie tell you guys that one? Make sure you have the city's insurance after your out of office, think back to Orvil Santa)

Ok critics... start taking shots at us
10/8/2010 7:34:27 AM
tudor says:
okay, if I have this straight.

The city handled this completely right from the beginning. They did nothing wrong and two weeks out from an election, hey, we are going forward because everything about this project is okay.

by the way, I support turbines.

But only one line should have everyone sitting up and paying attention.


Evans, in the report, acknowledged the threat of lawsuits from “several parties." Nothing has yet to be filed in court.



so, everyone knew that the residents had threatened a lawsuit so who are the "parties" that city lawyer is referring to.


anyone with half a brain must conclude that Horizon had threatened a lawsuit and the city had no where to turn because from day 1, they blew this deal.


But hey, two weeks before an election, we are going to tell you how great a job we did.


Absolutely, positively, amazing.



are people really going to buy into this.

I can't wait to see an editorial blasting this decision. Wait, that won't happen because the newspapers candidate for Mayor, the incumbent, is part of this mess
10/8/2010 7:47:35 AM
Made says:
That's funny, they don't want to 'cost taxpayers more money'? Why did they request that Dillon Consulting do the EXACT same viewshed analysis review as Hoshizaki did June 22, 2010:

Dear Joel (DePeuter),
We have completed our analysis of the “Visual Impact Assessment Report prepared by
Cartographics and dated May 17, 2010 for the proposed Big Thunder Wind Park (located at:
(
DRAFT_Visual_Impact_Assessment_Report_Cartographics.pdf_).
Our analysis was comprised of replicating the viewshed map to see if our results mirrored
the report’s map, as well as verifying that the simulations of the turbines shown in the
photos were reasonable. (Report by Gail Murray)

And this report was more informative than Dillon's!!!

WE ALREADY KNEW IT WAS ACCURATE! The question that council NEEDS answered in order to make a informed, appropriate, timely and knowledgabe decision was whether the viewshed analysis was ADEQUATE. It is so FAR from adequate it is disgusting!

WHAT A CIRCUS PERFORMANCE at CITY HALL!!! Looks like none of them want back in! No backbones!
10/8/2010 7:49:07 AM
nads74 says:
Let the lawsuits begin!!!!
10/8/2010 8:28:24 AM
windphart says:
Is anyone surprised at this? I'm not. Administration as been obsessed with this project since the beginning and has broken some municpal laws to do it (check out the municpal act).

Council is however, divided on the issue; with the fence sitters ultimately being the ones who sign this off or reject it. Just remember the ones who approve the project are also the same ones who ignore the proper process. Sure, it's wind turbines today but they did it with the marina and now this. If you vote these clowns in they're bound to do it again on some future project. Some project that YOU might be interested in.
It's not just wind turbines they're voting for. It's the process that they've skipped, done wrong, and still have the time to correct. I've said it before; they can force them to move the turbines back out of sight and everyone wins. Not everyone will be "happy", but it will be a fair compromize for both sides with no lawsuits on either side.
It's funny that they say they're not intimidated by lawsuits by the opposers of the project. In reality, they're intimidated only by the amount of a lawsuit. Horizon holds the bigger guns to ask for more money...that has their attention.
As for the election hopefuls, Mr. Hobbs said at the open house it will be a different story (directed at Horizon)once he's in the Mayor's chair. Looks like the current council is trying to smother your fire.
10/8/2010 8:32:12 AM
tsb says:
"City council will vote Tuesday whether or not to approve Horizon's turbine locations. Administration has recommended they do so."

Hmmm... we could have some fun with this......

"City council will vote Tuesday whether or not to change Larry Hebert's name to Tansy McTinklepuffs. Administration has recommended they do so."

"City council will vote Tuesday whether or not to built a subway to Strange Township. Administration has recommended they do so."

"City council will vote Tuesday whether or not to invade South Ossetia. Administration has recommended they do so."

Yes.. Oh, yes.. I quite like this one!
10/8/2010 8:43:25 AM
tiredofit says:
Evans says: "in the report, acknowledged the threat of lawsuits from “several parties."
Well, according to my math, several usually refers to more than a couple.. and we're aware of the 1: the Residents, 2:Horizon, so who are the others... the plot thickens! (much like the minds of council).

by the way TSB, I'm in favor of item #1, however I would prefer Tansy McTinklepharts, has a better ring to it and well the smell it implies seems to set the mood.
10/8/2010 9:00:55 AM
docm says:
I live in the Neebing ward and I don't have an issue with the location of the turbines. What I do have an issue with is that Thunder Bay Hydro has to pay Horizon Wind ridiculous rates for the energy produced by the turbines and that Horizon is not responsible for decommissioning the turbines at the end of their life cycle. Economically speaking it's a bad deal for Thunder Bay unless the contract is rewritten.
10/8/2010 9:09:16 AM
n00n says:
If the turbines are approved (as they should have been a long time ago), the amount of lawsuits will be small. Once you have to put your own money into fighting a losing cause, in most instances, 'the cause' becomes less important.

We could have put the turbines 'front and center' in the new waterfront...as a young family in the City, we support this move completely. Move over for progress.
10/8/2010 9:14:09 AM
pieislandrefugee says:
I think the whole project is wrong in every way, but thats not the biggest issue here.

The big issue is how poor this was handled. Its almost comical.

What I want to see is some heads roll over this. I dont mean figuratively either.

The mayor should be run outta town for this, after she is held financially responsible. However, she is not alone in this mess. Every name thats on this contract or agreement should be held financially responsible for this personally.

The City works for US. Its duty is to its citizens, not Horizon. These "people" have neglected their duty, position, and responsibility.

They need to be held accountable so this type of mass idiocy is never repeated in the future.

I want blood.
10/8/2010 9:34:08 AM
The Badger Mountain Hermit says:
I've become suspicious of city administation's unaccountability and relative free hand in influencing the numerous past poor decisions of the elected. The city lawyer? Where's she been during all this? On a sabbatical? Who knows really what's going on, behind all the closed doors? Not the folks who will pay the price.
10/8/2010 9:40:07 AM
mvp's ballin says:
what's going on behind all closed doors? it's simple "pay to play politics" at it's finest!!!


Ballin!!!!!
10/8/2010 9:58:44 AM
hunterthedog says:
tiredofit: your opinion would likely receive more contemplation by others if you could figure out the difference between "your" and "you're".
10/8/2010 10:10:25 AM
tbayguy009 says:
This is a great example of how governments at ALL levels work. Local, provincial and federal. Back room deals and lobbists change the landscape (pun intented) without giving a darn about how the people that ARE being affected feel. Modern democracy has been transformed into allowing people to vote for their next dictator. Nothing more. All government processes need, is a room full of 'like minded' people to from a quarum (or ensure a majority) and then vote to change something. They just need the right people in the room at the time of the vote.

How is it that citizens can even keep up with the constant state of changes. It makes a person's head spin! People have better things to do than to just keep track of these several levels of government. But, people just wake up one day, and something has been done to affect them. If (or when) citizens complain, it is usually too late. The backroom deals have been done!

This whole wind farm deal is all this! At it finest. Booo! Thumbs down! The rest of the fiction being thrown around about the merrits of this project here are useless. But, there is no time left. Council is hopefully done here. Their legacy will leave a 'bad taste in peoples mouths' for a very, very long time. The definition of public servant is being rewritten.

Macleans .. 07/2009

10/8/2010 10:15:13 AM
maztec says:
What exactly are the people of Neebing who are opposed to the project going to sue for? You can't just sue somebody cause you don't like them.
10/8/2010 10:17:41 AM
baby maple says:
This last year has been a nightmare since finding out about Horizon's proposed "Industrial Wind Farm". How has something like this happened in a so called democratic society? This deal was made behind closed doors with residents not even being aware of what was happening. To destroy a beautiful setting such as the Norwester Mountains in the name of "green" energy is insanity. The only thing green about this project are the millions of dollars that this southern ontario developer will be laughing all the way to the bank with. We can say goodbye to ever having the Norwesters used for recreation again, goodbye to the crosscountry ski trails (yes Mr Ian Angus)the roads needed to bring in these monstrosities will destroy what is left of these trails. The fight is not over, this is my home and I am proud to be standing up for what I believe has been a travisty.
10/8/2010 10:21:13 AM
baby maple says:
This last year has been a nightmare since finding out about Horizon's proposed "Industrial Wind Farm". How has something like this happened in a so called democratic society? This deal was made behind closed doors with residents not even being aware of what was happening. To destroy a beautiful setting such as the Norwester Mountains in the name of "green" energy is insanity. The only thing green about this project are the millions of dollars that this southern ontario developer will be laughing all the way to the bank with. We can say goodbye to ever having the Norwesters used for recreation again, goodbye to the crosscountry ski trails (yes Mr Ian Angus)the roads needed to bring in these monstrosities will destroy what is left of these trails. The fight is not over, this is my home and I am proud to be standing up for what I believe has been a travisty.
10/8/2010 10:26:21 AM
Chaos says:
Where is the public report found?
10/8/2010 11:01:47 AM
Me n My Opinion says:
I'm neither a proponent nor an opponent of this project. I don't live in Neebing, and quite frankly, trying to make a true informed decision on the project itself would be way more involved than I'm willing to spend the time on. However, I feel I have to make a more general comment.

All the people on this site that are talking about the city not "getting enough" out of this deal are the same people that complain that the city makes it too difficult for other industries to relocate here. Doesn't this seem like a contradiction to anyone else? Same goes with the Waterfront Development and the concessions the city made for the developers.

Whether or not you agree with the project is irrelevant, but decide whether you want to make it difficult or easy for industry to relocate here. It doesn't excuse mistakes or oversights on council and administration, but making it easy for development to happen IS the role of the city, and if they have to make some concessions to make it happen, then so be it. Let's make a friendly, inviting environment for people wanting to develop here.
10/8/2010 11:13:17 AM
mountainman says:
So let me get this straight; people are actually surprised that Marky mark and his funky bunch sidekick, turbine Tim, are recommending that council endorse this boondoggle. They’ve been in Horizon’s hip pocket for years. The only real surprise here is that the mayor and her band of merry morons actually believe that the taxpayers of Thunder Bay will reelect them after four years of ineptitude and incompetence. Oct. 25th is coming. It’s time for them all to go.
10/8/2010 11:14:54 AM
nivlacw says:
I am in favour of wind turbine as a means to generate energy. I am opposed to the Thunder Bay Wind Turbine project for the way the "deal" was handled. I would really like to see who votes in favour of this and who votes against it as it will help me with my voting decisions.

Anyone know what Andrew Foulds position is on the wind farms?

As an aside, I wonder if the folks in Neebing would be opposed to the Wind Turbines if they were located the proper recommended distance away and if the financial deal was better for the city?

It would make more sense having these turbines further off in the bush where they are not as much of an eyesore and a better financial deal for the taxpayers. The current deal seems like it will cost us money.

Where can we find the actual numbers of the "deal"?
10/8/2010 11:24:54 AM
simonandgarfunkel says:
i feel it is my duty as a polish-russian to comment on the fact that these wind farms are great for the economy and will quell any socialist revolutions that may arise.
10/8/2010 11:32:50 AM
anonymous2000 says:
NIMBY

I'll be happy to see the turbines built.

I'll be even happier if the people who post comments are less negative and close minded.
10/8/2010 12:27:11 PM
gusto says:
I know many many people who will vote for the incumbants if they approve these turbines and will vote against any that vote against them. The few citizens who oppose this are as usual the loudest. Enjoy your turbines Neebing, they are coming whether you like it or not.
10/8/2010 12:31:02 PM
windphart says:
Hey Simonandgarfunkel....we loved "The Sounds of Silence", but thanks for coming out....whatever the heck that comment was. Go Solidarity.

@nivlacw - I believe that councillor is in favour of it.

@me n my opinion: Let me fast track you....Horizon and industry is not relocating here. They'll hire out of town contractors to do the work then leave THREE FT jobs here that's it. The city's been more than friendly and they've gobbled up miles for a few inches given.
10/8/2010 12:41:49 PM
thunder man says:
I am encoureged that the public is beginning to realize that there is a serious problem at City Hall. Lynn Peterson and Council have been manipulated by Administration during this entire process. Now they are desperately doing damage control. I see this Council as a weak one that has never been interested in open consultations. This is certainly the wrong site for this project. It will be interesting to see who has the courage to stand up and be accountable on Tuesday night!
10/8/2010 1:10:54 PM
tiredofit says:
hunterthedog, I'm the first to admit that without my word processor I'm a horrible speller, alas.. I was once gifted with great penmanship as well but that to has fall by the wayside. Modern technology has killed many things... including the English language!
10/8/2010 1:54:47 PM
turbo man says:
It is unbelievable that Dillon Consulting was only given one week to produce their report. Does this appear to be due dilgence?
10/8/2010 2:42:40 PM
mountainman says:
gusto:
Enjoy your big hydro rate increase. It's coming whether you like it or not.
10/8/2010 3:03:15 PM
windphart says:
Ahhh, you have to love the maturity and intelligence on this forum. "Enjoy your turbines". How mature. Maybe this once I'll stoop to your level and say "Enjoy your tax and hydro increases".

What's even funnier is Annonymous2000 calls for us to not be so negative in our posts yet calls us NIMBY's. Good job.
10/8/2010 3:04:20 PM
tbayguy009 says:
This is a great example of how governments at ALL levels work. Local, provincial and federal. Back room deals and lobbists change the landscape (pun intented) without giving a darn about how the people that are being affected feel. Modern democracy has been transformed into allowing people to vote for their next dictator. Nothing more. All government processes need, is a room full of 'like minded' people to for a quarum (or a majority) and vote to change something. They just need the right people in the room at the time of the vote.

How is it that citizens can even keep up with the constant state of changes. It makes a person's head spin! People have better things to do than to just keep tract of several levels of government. But people just wake up one day, and something has been done to affect them. If (or when) citizens complain, it is usually too late. The backroom deals have been done!

This whole wind farm deal is all this! At it finest. Booo! Thumbs down! The rest of the fiction being thrown around about the merits of this project here are useless. But there is no time left. Council is hopefully done here. Their legacy will leave a 'bad taste in peoples mouths' for a very long time. The definition of public servant is being rewritten.

Macleans .. 07/2009

10/8/2010 4:13:42 PM
tiredofit says:
The province turned down the site, what does that tell you? Everyone tells us; oh your just being Nimby's, and you’ll just be suing yourself. Perhaps, but if we let the city & Horizon get away with this, then they’ll keep on doing it and next time it will be your back yard. Do I want to sue the city? NO! Will I? You bet, I’ll gladly hand over my hard earned cash to prove a point in this case, why you ask? Simple, it’s wrong on so many levels and I’ll say it again, as a resident of the area I’m not opposed to Turbines or wind generated power, or even on the escarpment, just not this close to homes and schools. There’s the potential that I can lose up to 40+ percent value in my house, heck, even if I lose 5% because of this, it’s 5% too much. Potential health concerns? I’m from the old school, better safe than sorry folks, I recall advertisements where doctors promoted smoking as a good thing.

The committee has done a great job on this and I for one commend them for their hard work!
10/8/2010 4:42:08 PM
panzerIV says:
For a successful lawsuit by people from neebing wouldn't it take years before it would actually happen. I can't see the courts taking on lawsuits of "they destroyed my view or I didn't want it so i sue'd" I think for the courts to even look at them the value of housing would have the drop substantially and be able to prove that the turbines caused it or down the road 10-15 years if there was health problems then they could sue but i can't see courts taking on these suits if its about a view.
10/8/2010 5:10:35 PM
tiredofit says:
I want to post this from the committees website as I feel it's important that the folks understand;

The NMEPC believes that any “green” energy project be well planned and include community input.

As David Suzuki said best “wind farms, like any development need to be sited properly and appropriately placed in areas where they can have the greatest possible effect with the smallest environmental footprint. After all, the whole point of clean energy is to reduce our environmental burden…not make it worse”

Therefore, the NMEPC endorses and believes plans for Wind Turbine Installation should:

1) be placed where existing infrastructure exists — ie. existing logging roads, etc. and not on pristine forest of rare northern trees (sugar maples, white pines, yellow birch, cedars)

2)be placed close to existing transmission lines — not requiring new installations and creating major environmental issues

3) not be placed near people and especially schools!

4)not be placed on sensitive sites — ie. natural, historical, recreational or scenic

Next time you feel the need to condem them, remember THEY ARE NOT AGAINTS GREEN ENGERY
10/8/2010 5:19:00 PM
tudor says:
first, hats off to the TBSource for having the backbone to call this decision ill-advised and rushed in their editorial.

You will notice they did not say this was the wrong decision or a bad decision. They stated that given the rush to have a report from Administration and given the closeness to the election, they have serious concerns about this decision being made.

Folks, for or against, pro or con, can anyone, any supporter really and truly say that this issue was handled well.

Can you say unequivocally that the way council conducted themselves for the past year was okay.

You can hate the opponents ( i think some of their science is very questionable ) but last time I checked in a democracy, they have the right to express their concerns. Most people only like opponents if they happen to agree with them.

This ball was dropped from the beginning. It was and still is a bad deal.

And to the poster who suggested that this somehow may stop business from locating here.

3 jobs

three jobs

1,2,3 jobs

in case you didn't get it.

3 jobs. That is the economic spin-off for job creation for Thunder Bay.

So green energy is great, I am glad we are moving away from traditional methods of creating power, and I hope we see more of them.

But this deal was, is and will be bad for Thunder Bay. That's the point.
10/8/2010 5:20:43 PM
Jollywally says:
Speaking of eye sores on the Nor Westers. How many decades has Big Thunder been rusting out and the infrastructure decaying? A colossial mess and eyesore if ever there was one without so much as a peep from our Neebing and South side freinds?
10/8/2010 5:21:41 PM
Nitesky says:
I visit the Soo periodically and they have wind turbines. They are located away from anyone and they still are HUGE and easy to see from a distance. These things could have been located in the shallow water east of Island #2 where the old city dump was located. Not many people live there and the wind blows unrestricted.
10/8/2010 5:39:20 PM
tiredofit says:
PanzerIV, I think you've missed the point, while I talked about values and view sheds, there is a lot more to this than simply that.
We all realize that it’s going to be a long hard battle. Some will simply give up and try to sell; others will live with it and so on. With that said, it's stilling going forward if need be. You mention health problems in 10-15 years, if they do happen (again, not saying they will) why do we have to wait and go doh! we told you so. By that time Horizon will be long gone and several million dollars richer.

The committee has a number of other options to either slow this down for years or all together if need be.

You want to see this end? 17000 acres, move them to the lake side, lots of wind over there. Move them down the highway to areas where there are no residential areas. Do you honestly think the residents enjoy doing this? This has consumed hundreds of hours of these individuals’ lives, if not thousands.

The only positive I've seen out of this mess is it's brought the vast majority of the residents together, created new and lasting friendships! And we've all become a little wiser on the ways of the world.
10/8/2010 6:18:24 PM
recguy says:
I live out west and have beem following this for awhile. I don't see any discussion of noise issues (although I suspect there has been). We were having a picnic near Ft. Mcleod last summer. There about 15 or 20 turbines on the nearby ridge. They were a good 8 or 9 km away. It sounded like the fleet was out harrowing the fields. and it never stopped all the time we were there...
10/8/2010 6:27:14 PM
angela says:
time for a little out of the box thinkin! were in this mess because of a few bad decisions maybe by both sides. So how do we get out of it is what we have to figure out in the first place. Who in there right frame of mind would even think about destroying an existing SUGAR MAPLE stand[ yes folks we have those here] Maybe you armchair quarterbacks could get off your butt ,go for a walk around the big thunder area[ you will have to trespass but some things are worth seeing]I went for a walk and educated myself to whats up there and it should be appreciated by all! So know that council is down to decision time, they clearly need to make an educated decision about the future of this town and our children. We have time to get this rite[our lites aren't flickering yet] location should not be a problem in this area we have tons of crown land clear-cutted that these wind mills would look great in. A land swap with the province would have to happen if on crown land but the provincial goverment got us here in the first place! The province could then protect the area and open it to the public for tourism and recreation. I don't think our kids need to fix our mistakes, .........
10/8/2010 7:08:04 PM
Jimbo says:
If this was a hockey game, many would be cited for Cherry Picking, selectively presenting facts and quotes.

There is a whole lot of Cognitive Distortions happening with this entire subject.

We need a Spin Spotter to sort it all out.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to public perception which can be seen as the difference between an absolute truth based on facts and a virtual truth shaped by popular opinion, media coverage and or reputation.
10/8/2010 8:39:31 PM
Peng says:
how about a flash back to another energy project brought to you by Mr Hebert and Mr Buszynski
(remember the wind farm deal was proposed in a resolution by Mr H)

About another (non wind) project here in tbay,

"In Ontario, project proponents are touting lower energy costs, creation of thousands of jobs, and the possibility of increased mining development as the project provides more access to electricity in remote areas of the province. The Chronicle-Journal newspaper of Thunder Bay also suggested the proposed power plant might enable construction of a smelter in that city.

Proponents claim environmental benefits for the power generation plant. Media materials circulated by Northwest Energy Works state, "the new generation facility would burn Petroleum Coke which is more environmentally friendly." "The market for generation is opening," said Larry Hebert, general manager of Thunder Bay Hydro and leading spokesperson for the Northwest Energy Works project."

THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE WIND FARM_ BUT THE BUNK SMELLS THE SAME
This was from MAY 2002 about the proposed Petroleum coke plant in Thunder Bay
It was another environmentally friendly, jobs, and 'money for nothing' scheme
Fortunately it went down the toilet like the turd it was

Now its time for Thunder Bay to flush the 'wind farm floater'- its starting to stink bad

Strange, the pet Coke facility environmental assessment was managed by a Mr Mario Buszynski of Senes Consulting- the same Mr B who appeared in front of council last week - coincidence??





10/8/2010 8:49:57 PM
Peng says:
From the Decision Day story - Maztac posted that Hydro provides only 14 % of Power and Coal 86% - This is so wrong I have to post my rebuttal here also (check decision day for all of Maztac post)
There is SO much misinformation out there it is incredible

Re Maztac says 14% of NW power comes from Hydro?????????

That is absolutely in error

I would put Hydro more in the 75 % to 100 %category, depending on time of day/year for NWO.


Go to the sygration website and check out ACTUAL power production on an hourly basis for each generator in Ontario

Thunder Bay and Atikokan Caol stations had ZERO generation today!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



I would love to here the basis for 14% because it is so far off

Let me give some more info
go to OPG website, there you can check out the capcity of hydro and thermal and nuclear stations
In NWO there 11 OPG hydro stations with a capacity of about 700 MW - many of which have high capacity factors and can operate to meet load demands (unlike wind which is non dispatchable nad has a CF of 20%). There are alos Abitibi and other company hydro stations.

Imports form manitoba are also from Hydro.

Yes the coal plants do operate to meet high demand times - but it is certainly not 86% of the time.
When the wind farms operate, there needs to be spinning reserve online- so actually once the wind farms are built it is possible that coal will operate MORE but at low levels to keep the biolers up to steam in case the wind blows too hard (and the wind has to shut down) or the wind stops (and the wind turbines stop turbining) - the power system MUST respond to demand in real time

Also, Atikokan is being converted to biomass (as could the THunder Bay station) which is supposedly greener than coal- but who knows with all the unsubstanitated talk out there




10/8/2010 9:13:39 PM
storm says:
Why didn't the city just put it on the waterfront.
They went and ruined that area...why not just keep all the destruction in one area instead of destroying two key locations in our town.
Cit council ...generations from now they will be cursing your dumb decisions
10/8/2010 10:02:44 PM
windphart says:
On paper, administration doesn't call the shots, but in reality half the council who hasn't a clue on this topic or hasn't taken the time to learn more is eating out of their hands.

You know...I could see that if Horizon had of been up front with the public and council and respond to the questions asked of them (from council) perhaps we'd give them some credibility. But let's look at their track record.
1. They ignored requests from council regarding the REA.
2. They bullied the residents through intimidation at their meetings.
3. They arrogantly claimed they "don't" want to move them and do business in good faith.
4. They know that they can hide behind McGuinty's "green" bandwagon to fast track their plan.

Mr. Commisso is trying to deflect the issue by telling the public to turn to the province and the REA to stop the process. Let's be realistic. The province hasn't rejected one project yet nor do they want to.

Nobody wants a lawsuit. You guys got us into this mess. Use your heads and get us out of this mess. Do the right thing. Show a compromize. Do something you can live with. Half of you will be voted out in a few weeks. The least you can do is go out with grace. That includes you too Lynne.
10/8/2010 10:11:43 PM
FernandoMartinez says:
"I will wait until Tuesday to decide," he shared via email. "I’m going over the report in fine detail to see if I’ve missed anything."


So Aldo doesn't know what's going on. With the amount of time this has been going on, how could he not have his mind made up already?
10/8/2010 10:17:25 PM
tdub says:
If you’re opposed to the Wind Turbines you have every right to try and stop it. You can write your Councilor, MPP, MP, Mayor or even Santa. If you want heads to roll over this thing, don’t take matters in your own hands – take em to court. After all you pay taxes. Why not tie them up with claims that you’ll suffer in the future. Wind Concerns Ontario, and NMPEC are convinced that these things are hell on wheels but doesn’t mean you’ll win. If that happens just claim that the judge or the crown didn’t do their “homework”, wasted taxpayer’s money or has little regard for Human Health, Property Rights, The Magna Carta, etc…….
There is another option here. Rather than react to a situation you can get ahead of the curve. The urban jungle is headed your way whether you like it or not. Digging in only buys you time. At what point is it worth exhausting yourself to fight for you and yours? Do you like going through the Municipal Act, Green Energy Act, MOE requirements to try and halt the deal or scare the public? Sooner or latter something or someone will offend your sensibilities, challenge your lifestyle, or be out of character. By virtue of the fact that you don’t like it, it must be a nightmare, outrage, travesty, ill thought and a boondoggle. You simply must head downtown, for the first time in years, to fight this thing.
Just minutes down Highway 61 there is a community of like minded, patriotic voyageurs, trail blazers and pioneers. They hate it when the government does stuff that they hate. It’s a community with an energy source more powerful than wind – Imagination. From time to time there are outages. In that case there’s a small, quiet, safe nuclear reactor. If your not one of those “bent out of shape” types it will be fine. If you’re into rumor milling or bad mouthing the back up energy source you can take your concerns elsewhere. Lots are available and you can build em Texas style (No other styles please). It’s more affordable than you think (if you need a number you can’t afford it). Why live with your problems when you can leave them behind. Take the big trek out to Prosperity Meadows ™ you’ll be glad you did.

If this happens again just remember the NIMBY playbook
- It’s Ugly
- It’s Noisy
- It’s not necessary
- It needs a subsidy
- I’m not opposed to it – it’s just happening to fast.
- Health might be an issue
- It’s murder on the resale.
- It’s a rotten, back room deal
- Taxes will go up
- Rates will go up.
- I am not a NIMBY (Yes you are)
- I support the project (No you don’t).

This works on any development or developer. Keep it up and pretty soon the city will have to negotiate the deal, build the turbines and cut the ribbon in total secrecy.
10/8/2010 11:43:12 PM
whatelseisnew says:
To "Jollywally" The reason why our Neebing and south side friends don't mind that mess and never complained is because they would rather see a heap of garbage rather then something working and helping solve the problem. Also... I did some head scratching on the whole lawsuit thing too. Its true...you can't sue because someone has "wrecked" your view of a mountain that isn't even yours. And as for health risks and such...YOU LIVE BESIDE A PAPERMILL LOL!!! I for one can't wait till these windmills are up. For the people driving in from Minnesota to see our windmills and how advanced enviromentally we are, not only is going to make me prouder to be a Canadian...but prouder to be a citizen of Thunder Bay.
10/9/2010 12:19:44 AM
Gord says:
If this goes ahead - Everyday, I will have to listen to "whoosh whoosh" of the turbines. We just built our dream home and now city council will ruin it for us. I plan to make sure every councillor that votes for this has their life disrupted as much as mine will be - fair is fair.
10/9/2010 8:03:02 AM
Pandora says:
I am so tired of our city councilors commending Our Administration for the great job they do(especially guilty Angus and Foulds, 'Everywhere' Rebecca, repeatedly)
In my opinion Administration, along with the Mayor are the key PROBLEMS.

There is no way they should be voting on this issue, this month, less than 2 weeks away from an election.
Mark Smith had everyone jumping through hoops (last April)about the bus depot, decisions had to made, in a weeks time, had to be moved, Court House...a building season, 6 months later, nothing...why is nothing happening there?
This does not have to be voted on this month, PERIOD.
10/9/2010 10:11:10 AM
FutureTbay says:
Tiredofit- David Suzuki has also been quoted saying "If one day I look from my cabin’s porch and see a row of windmills spinning in the distance, I won’t curse them. I will praise them. It will mean we are finally getting somewhere.”
10/9/2010 10:34:48 AM
DohNutz says:
Horatio:
He waxes desperate with imagination.
Marcellus:
Let's follow. 'Tis not fit thus to obey him.
Horatio:
Have after. To what issue will this come?
Marcellus:
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

Hamlet Act 1, scene 4, 87–90

City administration appears to have had a free hand under the current council - they appear to have undertaken a risk assessment of their options and decided that the risks associated with a lawsuit from the wind farm opponents is less than those associated with breaking the deal with Horizon. It was a poor decision to sign an agreement that did not have an escape clause for the City. Post the agreement publicly - post the minutes of the in-camera sessions with Horizon and administration - we, the taxpayers need to know how this decision was made.

Transparency - non-existent in all levels of modern government.
10/9/2010 10:38:37 AM
windphart says:
FutureTBay:
Exactly....key word "distance". What we've been pitching all along. Glad you're finally getting it.
10/9/2010 10:59:21 AM
george2000 says:
whatelseisnew.

I too will be proud of our move to windmills, but unfortunately that is not the issue as I see it.

I see a bad decision ECONOMICALLY, I see a bad decision LONG TERM COSTS, and I see a bad decision REVENEU STREAM FOR US, and I really see a bad decision on LOCATION

Now we are all entitled to our opinion but for you is this really about being proud about moving towards windmills.

Should it not be this simple.

Is this contract, this decision, and this location in the long term best interests of the community and did the community do a good job of handling this entire matter.

If you can answer yes to those questions, then you have my support. If you hesitate in even answering one of them, then you may begin to understand just what much of this fight has been about.

I am all for windmills.

I am not for ruining people's business - potentially-, and I am certainly not for blasting a road up the face of the mountain.
10/9/2010 12:05:48 PM
tbayguy009 says:
To Peng: Thanks for pointing that out. It was going to write something about that myself. But the problem is, facts like those need to get past the 'censorship' here. Thank goodness for other places of REAL information.

Hydro generation IS THE MAJOR FORM of power generation IN THIS AREA. It is entirely stable and predicable. NOT, like wind generation ever could be, or will be. You are entirely correct by pointing out the the coal plants will need to be in persistant 'standby' mode, more than ever before.

On side note. I believe Kakabeka Falls is REQUIRED to open their spillways to allow water flow over the falls on the weekend for tourists. Isn't that just a waste of potential stored energy production for the benefit of 'site seeing'? YET, the distruction of other tourist areas is 'imminent' to generate power by other means. I find that ironical!

Hydro projects have been in the works for years, the Little Jackfish River project comes to mind. (it is still 'in the works'). AND, did not a Native group just get a run of the river power project online.

Wind turbines should be located where there aren't hydro generation prospects. When available, hydro projects should be FIRST in line. When the wind doesn't blow, the dams will have to 'fix' the power distribution issues. Beyond that, the coal plants will need to react quickly to respond to demand. A good plan would be to buy surge protectors for everything you own if this wind project is supposed to be a major source of energy for the area.
10/9/2010 12:31:20 PM
Chaos says:
I had a chance to read the materials on the City's website for purposes of the Oct 12 meeting. I must say I am surprised how much $ is likely already spent, and also the faith the City and admin puts on, out of town consultants and lawyers.

First point is why would you need out of town lawyer to get advice on an option agreement for a lease? The City solicitor needs a “second opinion” for an option agreement for a lease from an out of town law firm? I was disappointed to see that. I’d assume the City enters into dozens of leases a year and I’d hate to think we would need an out of town law firm to give her a second opinion for each. Lease disputes and interpretation of leases from the little I know about the law is a common occurrence. Giving her the benefit of the doubt, even if the City was unsure and their was a lot pressure to be sure, there would have been many qualified lawyers in town to give such advice, assuming the City solicitor really needed a second opinion. I just find it a waste of tax dollars to pay for an opinion for which you have already hired someone to give – that being the City solicitor. Even worse is the local tax money is not spent locally when it clearly could have.

The same goes for the consultants. If we are going to spend that money why couldn’t they hire an in town consultant? Green Energy Act is new thing. In my opinion nobody can genuinely say, and I'm talking about the experts consultants, that this is the way its going to be, or the process will be like this, or the process will take the concerns raised seriously...how would they know? Are they having coffee with the decision makers, or is there some source of credible fact or policy or directive that they are referring to. They don’t sayi ntheir report. I’m sure they City could have hired a local consultant to say: well were not really sure, but we think X, with no sources and then go on to qualify what they say over and over. Yes we get it, nobody really knows for sure. Everything is evolving. Where is my 100k - thank you very much. Did we really need to hire someone from out of town to do that? If we really did need it, could they not hire someone local to keep the tax dollars in town?

To sum up, the tax revenue likely to be generated by the wind farm development has probably already been spent on these out of town consultants and lawyers. The futre tax revenue has already left town in the pockets of out of town lawyers and consultants. My point is why is City staff and council seeking this type of consultant / legal work (and all on a rush basis which will cost the city more $$) over an issue that is, in part, their decision to make and within their job description, and for the other part full of unknowns.

I demand those costs be made public.
10/9/2010 1:21:50 PM
tiredofit says:
FutureTbay, I'll pull a quote from the same story you did: "proper environmental assessments need to be done before beginning wind-farm projects" They have failed to date to provide a proper environmental study on this. They have failed to address the 16 major concerns the city had with this project (yet they been told, eh.. don't worry about it by a lawyer)

Have you noticed something else? The only individuals to date that have really made money on this project are ALL out of town experts? I know I would prefer to see my hard earned tax dollars being spent locally as would you.

Now, with that said and done, from the number of post 59 as of this writing, that vast majority appear to be from individuals who are all pretty feed up with Administration. Remember this, Thunder Bay is a Corporation, you and I as residents and tax payers are the owners, the council is the “Board of Directors” if you will, placed there by us. If this was any other Corp, they Board would be laughed out of the company (which may very well happen to some on the 25th). Regardless, there job is to listen to the shareholders, seems to be a real lack of that, not only on this project, but many others to boot.

Now for the 1000th time, we are in favor of this project if done correctly, but that ship has long since sailed the great lakes.
10/9/2010 5:44:37 PM
tiredofit says:
tdub says: "This works on any development or developer. Keep it up and pretty soon the city will have to negotiate the deal, build the turbines and cut the ribbon in total secrecy."
Umm.. they did the bulk of it secrecy, so hey, why not finish it that way.
By the way, you were very poetic in that last post. However, you assume we will lose, which may not be the case, if in the end they build it, we will ensure that it's well away from the current location. Point is, if takes us years, we don't mind, heck, longer the better I think.
10/9/2010 6:11:25 PM
tiredofit says:
tdub says: "This works on any development or developer. Keep it up and pretty soon the city will have to negotiate the deal, build the turbines and cut the ribbon in total secrecy."
Umm.. they did the bulk of it secrecy, so hey, why not finish it that way.
By the way, you were very poetic in that last post. However, you assume we will lose, which may not be the case, if in the end they build it, we will ensure that it's well away from the current location. Point is, if takes us years, we don't mind, heck, longer the better I think.
10/9/2010 6:33:11 PM
HML says:
In all of my adult life, I have never witnessed a period of so many discontented taxpayers with the administration and the elected council members of this town! There has been so much wasted time with different groups of citizens that are trying to preserve the things that made them want to live and raise their families here. They shouldn't have to be involved in saving their neighbourhood! It's sad that so many issues created by so few people in powerful positions have been the cause of so much anguish. When these passionate residents try to stand up for their cause, they are,for the most ignored by City Hall and ridiculed by groups of residents who obviously have no passion for anything. My only hope is, that come October 25 we will elect a different group of council members who will truly represent the municipal taxpayer, the people that they are supposed to speak for. Maybe then we will regain our lost trust in our City Hall.
10/9/2010 8:34:39 PM
Peng says:
re tbayguy009 and kakabeka waste of water

Water is provided for scenic viewing purposes at kakabeka Falls
It is absolutely lost power generation, but it serves to maintain a valuable tourist view, and does 'share ' some of the resource

The roots of this requirement lie in the Jensen agreement from over a hundred years ago - it specified a minimum flow over the falls while allowing for the power generation development.

The flow over the Niagara Falls has a similar agreement but it is binational , with daytime and nighttime flows specified, with the remainder of water used for power generation. This is from 1950.

It seems that even 50 to 100 years ago there was recognition of the value of multi user resources and the value of scenic views.

In Thunder Bays' rush to be 'green' it has taken backward steps.
10/9/2010 9:21:42 PM
Peng says:
WOW

read the Dillon report and admins report

Both are pathetic
Both ignore the obvious deficiencies of the horizon viewshed analysis and maintain the tired line that what was done was correct in the method that it was done.

Ask a stupid question and get a stupid answer.
Too bad the city probably spent tens of thousands on this second 'consultant review'

The dillon report doesnt even say who did the work- just 21 pages of Dillon advertising their wind experience.
It doesnt say what info the 'tower relocation' is based on
It says wind energy evaluations are based on one single wind component (lowest wind speed) - that is like saying a house value can be based only on number of bathrooms- once again we have smoke and mirrors (and closed door shenanigans)


The city had enough info last June to say the viewshed analysis was unsatisfactory- how many times do they need to get a consultant to review???

(the answer is - until they get the answer they want)
10/9/2010 9:30:24 PM
Gord says:
futuretbay - when you start quoting david suzuki - you have officially hit rock bottom. sad
10/9/2010 10:14:44 PM
2cent says:
I don't know much about the windfarm but I can't see why we need it.. I guess were going to save the world from pollution I donno, What I do know is this controversy is out of control and the citizens of Thunder Bay need to look closely at the candidates for the upcoming election and get out and vote. This probably could of been avoided if intelligent people where running the city.
10/10/2010 12:40:49 AM
57mak says:
tbayguy009,Peng,
KB does produce electricity via underground tubes from a mile above falls to 1/2 mile below falls.Right beside the Cascades.
10/10/2010 10:44:47 AM
Beaks says:
Here is a little something for people to read the AVERAGE wind speeds of Thunder Bay for the past 30 years :
The Average wind speed is 10 knots or 20 km/h, or light wind.
And that's free info on the weathernetwork
And just by coincidence on the Horizon site I found a lovely graphic stating they need a minimum of 10 mp/h or 9 knots of wind to be work; period. Well that's our average wind speed, not the lowest.
See for yourself:
10/10/2010 10:51:14 AM
sam says:
This has to be the worst case of the NIMBY syndrome ever. When the turbines are up and running this issue will be quickly forgotten because none of the negative consequences of this project will ever materialize.

Also for Gord who says the whoosh whoosh sound of wind turbines will ruin his life, and goes on to threaten councillors who have disrupted his life, sounds like to me buddy you dont have a life. You should chill out, all I can say is the sound from the wind turbines, even if you can hear it will not be that bad, you will quickly get used to it.
10/10/2010 12:47:05 PM
turbo man says:
So T Bay lets show city council on Tuesday at 4pm at city hall what we really think. City councillors haven't listened to our concerns so lets get out and maybe the show of voters will get their attention
10/10/2010 2:41:01 PM
tiredofit says:
Beaks, wrong Horizonwind site, that's another more responsible company. With that said, you'll notice on page you pointed the readers to it clearly states that "Modern wind turbines are designed to work most efficiently at wind speeds between 15 and 35 MPH."

So, according to your information provided, the average windspeed for Thunder Bay is 20km hr or 12.5 MPH (FYI the link you provided doesn't work, but I'll take your word for it). So basically the turbines are just going to sit there and not spin.

What is the point your trying conveny? I'm not sure.
10/10/2010 6:25:42 PM
tk0224 says:
I have a great idea - let's build a nuclear power plant instead!

Note the sarcasm - what is wrong with embracing clean energy?

Clearly I am missing the boat on all of the negativity about this project.
10/10/2010 7:07:34 PM
CarbonFootprinter says:
@Beaks. For proper wind data, you need to refer to the MNR's Ontario Wind Resource Atlas.


The weathernetwork data (btw your link doesn't work) is for wind at ground level measured at the airport weather station.

The wind data on the mnr's site is archived for many heights, but the one concerned with wind turbines is 80 magl (magl is meters above ground level). For the area in question the wind speed average is 6-7 meters/second or about 21-25 km/h. Also considered in the "low acceptable to low excellent" range on their scale.

There is also an option to research the historical "wind power" in the area as well. Though the "legend" for interpretation of the colors seems to have disappeared since the last time i consulted it. It used to be there, and would be measured in Watts per square meter, again at a certain height above ground level. In this case 80 magl.

Your weathernetwork theory is moot, as the meteorological tower that was erected near the peak south of the skihill is the real measure of whether the project would/would not have been viable. If the locals had the foresight to somehow sabotage the data it was collecting, way back when, perhaps horizon would have looked elsewhere.
10/10/2010 9:29:55 PM
nads74 says:
@tk0224 read a bit of the history about what is going on and you'll soon understand that city hall made a terrible deal with the devil. NO ONE is against green energy!

It was a horrible deal from the get go, and did nothing positive for Thunder Bay!

and @sam... Ya might get used to that sound, but the people looking to buy houses in that area won't want to get used to...bye bye property values!!
10/10/2010 10:39:53 PM
tbayguy009 says:
I think a lot of people are missing the point. Even about the earlier comments about hydro-electric generation.

I would think my earlier points were ALL ABOUT green energy (hydro). Nuclear plants make up close to 2/3 of total power generation according to the actual production numbers on the Sygration website. What green house gases to they product? However I would think people would not want more nuclear plants. Right now quite a few fossil fuel plants are idle. The coal plants are opbiously last on the list to start up. (which is good)

Also realise that China has been building to coal generation station at the rate of one a month for years. Their carbon ash can be detected half way around the world. (identified by isotobe fingerprinting)

But could someone here explain the local NEED for wind generated power? Without the scare tactic of reporting 86% production by burning fossil fuels (very inaccurately I might add). When in reality the coal plants have been unproductive recently. Hydro generation would alway be a better choice, by far. Yet the supporters of this project don't care about the cost to build it. They want to trivialize the local impacts to people that would live by it. There are no doubt other locations with less impact. Yet, there has never been a case made for it's need in any discussion here. No one cares about the decision of paying the producer of wind generated energy more than OPG charges the customers.

Why is it the 'common sense' isn't so common?
10/10/2010 11:21:00 PM
tsb says:
Nuclear power is the greenest of the non-green energy sources. I honestly wouldn't mind having one here, but I can understand why so many people would oppose it.
10/10/2010 11:36:22 PM
tiredofit says:
CarbonFootprinter, no one would dispute your findings as incorrect. However the concern by the residences is as follows:

*Potential health risk* (agreed, not fully proven)

*Potential Decline in property value (well proven)

*Too close to residential areas & school*

*Potential loss of Loch Lomond Ski Hill and 100+ jobs in favor of how many? 1-3 with Horizon*

* 17000 acres and they *must* put them at the front of the mountains*

*Originally this project was way down the highway, but even the province refused to lease them the land based on what they wanted to pay*

*When all is said and done, the city will have made $0.00 on this after lawsuits, adjust property values, $7 million spent by TBHydro on lines, yet $880 million in project profits go straight to Toronto & the Developers bank account*

*The way the deal was done by the city*

*Horizon is NOT a good neighbor*

(side note, these are only a few of the concerns that really stand out, but let's not rehash them all)

I'd like to expand on that last point. When approached by the residents, they were totally ignored them from day one. When they finally do given in and hold consultations the way they are legally obligated to, they intimidate the residents by having no less that 6 security guards, 4 police officers, video tape your every move, tell you unless you provide you full name, address, phone number they refuse to let you access the session. I can assure you, the two events I attended, I felt greatly intimidated and did nothing other than go to get information (didn’t say a peep!)

They feel they have carte blanche and can even intimidate City Hall (I can assure you, the threat of legal action if not signed before election is VERY REAL on Horizon’s part).

City Hall clearly stated that they wanted the 16 concerns address by Horizon, yet the failed to address most, if not all. They’ll spend tens of thousands of dollars on smoozing local business, but fail to provide simple information like a proper full view shed analysis. Even the last hired specialist, Dillion said it would have been more favorable to do so.

*BUILD THEM, BUT DO IT CORRECTLY PLEASE AND THANK YOU*

Lynn and those at large in favour, you've lost a lot of support in this area, too bad, because at one point, you had a lot of respect from me and many others. Now,(in my personal opinion) you look like nothing more than a group of panic strick rats trying to save yourself before the ship sinks.
10/11/2010 9:01:03 AM
Gord says:
sam - if you truly believe that, give me your address - I'll make sure you get to listen to the noise as well. "you'll get used to it" Are you serious??

Again, to the people who use the term NIMBY as a negative thing - it makes no sense... if someone is doing something "in your backyard" that disrupts your life or property values, you have every right to oppose.
10/11/2010 9:18:33 AM
Peng says:
Re wind resource mapping

No experienced developer would rely on that mapping and one test tower for 17,000 acres.


The data may look good, but using it to locate specific towers is like CSI miami blowing up a variety store surveillance photo to show the freckles on the robbers face.

It just doest work like that in the real world

There are few weather data collection sites in NWO
I believe there are 2 in thunder bay, the closest at the airport. This type of 'mapping' is normally produced by using modeling to predict some parameter and then using whatever data is available (limited in observation location and period of collection). There just isnt enough real information to consider the wind atlas mapping as 'data' - they are 'statistics'.

from the MNR wind atlas website
"The wind industry uses these maps to locate areas for more thorough local investigation. Generally, wind statistics provided in the resource maps need to be verified by a wind resource assessment program which involves the use of wind monitoring towers at the site of interest."

Wind monitoring TOWERS - plural
The use of one wind tower is ridiculous to try to verify wind speed, direction (in 3 planes), and duration over 17,000 acres of complex terrain on top of a 600 foot plateau.

SO, why would Horizon rely on only one tower??
IMO
1. because they had to put up at least one as per the City/Horizon agreement
2. because they really dont care whether the wind is good or great- either way at 135$/MWh they stand to make mucho dinero
3. Because they are an on the cheap, property development company with little to no real experience in power project development- the are ignorant of how to development a project properly
Even their 'engineer' Nguyen seems oblivious to what the specifications and operational characteristics are for the proposed towers (as per AUg 23 open house, wasnt aware of 'reduced noise night time operation in manuf. specs)
10/11/2010 11:29:37 AM
Peng says:
Re tko224 'lets build a nuke

first , We dont need any more power in NWO

second, How about a better idea
In NWO dont build any of the high priced unnecessary power
Dont build nuclear
dont build wind
dont build solar

We dont NEED any more energy here - even after we shut down coal

IF we need more power here in the future, look at other options to reduce demand first,
ie LED lighting
reduced consumption -shut off lights, lower thermostat, use clotheslines
on demand water heaters
ground source heat pumps
more efficient and smaller appliances
better home insulation
and on and on

and finally if more power is needed - local - ie COMMUNITY - power development - NOT INDUSTRIAL developments.

If solutions are local, then there is NO 'Nimby' because the costs and benefits are realised locally

10/11/2010 11:41:09 AM
sam says:
@Gord, like I have said before, if you live in the city, you do not have the right to absolute peace and quiet, you have to put up with all kinds of noise, that is just the way it is. And I am very serious, you will get used to it, quite frankly I dont even think you will notice it.
As for the meaning of NIMBY I think it is an attitude many selfish people have when it comes to development.
And you certainly have a right to oppose this project, but you cant be using bs like property values going down, or noise and health problems, because then you look even more selfish then you already are.
At the end of the day you can choose to live with the wind turbines, and life goes on, or you can choose to have these wind turbines disrupt your life, it is all up to you.
10/11/2010 3:56:22 PM
canuckman55 says:
tk0224: there are no emissions from nuclear plants.
10/11/2010 5:34:00 PM
Gord says:
@sam - you have made my point - you can choose to live in the City and deal with traffic noise, etc. Bottom line here is that I am not being given the "choice", City Council is doing that without public input. I made the choice to live away from noist and disruption, and I resent someone taking that choice away from me without my input. Clearly, you chose to live in the City and good for you for making a choice and sticking with it. For what its worth, I agree with your philosphy that ultimately, how you view things is a choice. However, I maintain my right to oppose having a stupid project that will cost me money and disturb my life thrust upon me without my input. Honestly, if I could see real upside of this project, aside from making a developer rich, I might be able to live with the negatives to obtain the net positives. Ultimately, if not wanting to lose money so a developer can get rich makes me selfish - then call me selfish all day long. Similarly, if I dont want something that disturbs my life in my backyard, call me NIMBY and I'll be proud of it.
10/11/2010 6:01:37 PM
stopthehandouts says:
Build them already! Typical TBay whining about any new developements, get on with the show already.

And as far as the noise...lol the wind powering the turbines makes more noise than the turbine its turning
10/11/2010 6:04:00 PM
baby maple says:
This is addressed to Sam. Obviously you've done no research on your own nor do you live in the area. "Get used to it". How would you feel if some industrial project was snuck in behind your back in your neighbourhood.
There is ample evidence to show not only will these 400' Industrial Turbines ruin the view shed, but they will create noise and yes, some people will suffer health effects. How would you like to live with shadow flicker every day? In case you don't know what that is, it would be like having a light switched on and off constantly in your home. Sound like fun to you?
10/11/2010 6:07:07 PM
jp says:
neebing did not want a race track maybe they will get used to the turbines they seem to think they are the only ones in this city
10/11/2010 6:20:44 PM
thisjustin says:
Peng makes some very valid points. I don't think most people actually get it however.

Very sad it this deal goes through. This is a wind farm that will:

-drive up electricity prices for the rate payers in Ontario.
-annoy and confound many property owners.
-suck valuable dollars out of Canada into some US corporate bank account.
-further empower the City to spend tax revenues from the project as though it's some new source of free money. This is not 'legitmate' tax income. It penalizes the taxpayers with no added value.

Thunder Bay loses "all round" with this wind farm.

10/11/2010 6:57:02 PM
windphart says:
jp, what the heck does a race track have to do with a windfarm? Looks like there's another bunch of folks here on this forum that hear one news story and think they're experts on the project. I can't be bothered to comment or educate the previous commentors who are narrow minded and oblivious to what is going on here.

Tuesday is Judgement day. It will be the fence sitters on council who will decide this fate as there appears to be an equal number of councillors who are for and against. Judging from today's poll I hope Lynne will be happy with her vote tomorrow night, as it's looking to be one of her last.

The wind farm isn't the only issue that's on the table. But judging from the pattern that we see administration pulling the councillor's strings on more than one issue has us thinking that it's time for a change.

I'm also guessing that councillors don't pay much attention if at all to this forum, so it doesn't matter what's said here. Even emails to councillors rarely go noticed enough for them to influence their decisions. We need representation from people who listen to the community. Not those grand standing to further their careers.
10/11/2010 7:59:37 PM
Eager Annie says:
The pieislandrefugee hit the nail on the head!!

How on earth has this gotten this far without consuting the people of Thunder Bay?! The City should be focused on it's residents and not appeasing private industry.

This is an election year, why has this not been put on the ballot as a PLEBISCITE? I suppose then it would be too clear to council what Thunder Bay REALLY wants, or in this case, does not!
10/11/2010 8:48:22 PM
baby maple says:
JP
What exactly does a race track have to do with this potential Industrial Wind Turbine Project?
Maybe you need to do some research before spouting off. This will destroy this area both visually and environmentally and the decision was made behind closed doors to do this. Maybe you are O.K with the City doing business this way, but as a tax payer I am furious.
10/11/2010 11:23:21 PM
windphart says:
I wonder how administration and the city lawyer can honestly say all information relevant and necessary to the decision-making process has been obtained when many of the questions they've asked Horizon have gone unanswered. Do you just say "Oh well", and move on? That works in grade 6.

Rebecca Johnson is quoted as saying "The city should spend at least two years listening to the public before making any decision on a MultiPlex Facility". Why does she have a different view on a wind farm?

The city is talking about securing decommissioning cost (if capitalized). They need to be covered by cash bonds held by independent third parties because many wind farm owners like Horizon turn out to be LLCs with few assets. Because tax breaks for wind are heavily front-loaded (depreciation – 5-6 years; production tax credit – 10 years), there are huge incentives for sales of facilities after tax breaks are used, or for abandonment if costs of maintenance, repair and/or replacement rise substantially.

Here's the catch folks.....

There is little protection for landowners from surety bonds that depend on premium payments or cash bonds held by an LLC-owner in case of insolvency or abandonment.

Pool 7 all over again.

Horizon refuses to indemnify businesses in the area (ie. a certificate from either Horizon or the City that if any accidents occur, the business will not be sued). The city has yet to even answer or acknowledge 3 lawyer letters from Loch Lomond ski area regarding this issue.

The City, on June 28th, found it reasonable to ask Horizon to perform a more adequate view shed analysis. The six that they had were far away. They stated publicly they did not have enough information on which to approve locations. HORIZON REFUSED. The city received NO NEW information. Now they’re being asked to pass the motion.

Complete reversal.

Horizon Wind only put up one test tower on 17,000 acres and says the turbines have to be right near that tower. They mentioned that the MNR Wind Atlas is not accurate enough yet appeared to use the data as a starting point in the beginning when they chose Square Top Mountain and eventually Mt. Johnson (Loch Lomond).

The City finally admits this is phase one. Phase two will be farther away as they can't be closer. Think about this for a moment....If they say they can’t verify wind further back, then how can they even consider it for phase if it hasn’t been tested? Horizon even said it’s “micro citing” and that wind is different 300 metres away. The city didn’t do their homework and they want us to pay for it.

How?

They don't have the data to show the turbines CAN’T be located elsewhere... YET CITY ADMIN IS PUSHING THIS THROUGH.....

Is it reasonable to hire a consultant to do work in 10 days, not provide them with ANY NEW data and have them report that they are accurate?

Conclusion: The city is scared of Horizon and is afraid to push for the answers originally asked. They're taking the low road and the easy way out. Guys like Tuchenhagen don't care; he's on his way out anyways. I'm guessing there's more old lumber on their way out too.
10/12/2010 12:18:11 AM
WaYnE says:
Who is Irene Bond, and what are her credentials? More importantly, what gives her the right to speak on behalf of ALL citizens of Thunder Bay?
10/12/2010 1:16:06 AM
tiredofit says:
JP, if I recall, Riverview Raceways closed due to high insurance costs. The land in question is now and has been for a while owned by the mill. Unless of course you were planning on building a race track somewhere else in the area. If that's not the area, then it would be beyond Loch Lomond Road which then would be the responsilbity of Neebing Township and the vast majority of residents would have zero input on it.

People, when making claims againts the residents, plase clarify yourself.
10/12/2010 7:17:18 AM
hadenough says:
Hey, docm, interesting to hear from someone from Neebing who is not against the project.
You stated "I live in the Neebing ward and I don't have an issue with the location of the turbines. What I do have an issue with is that Thunder Bay Hydro has to pay Horizon Wind ridiculous rates for the energy produced by the turbines "

Just to clarify something, TBH does not pay Horizon for the power they will/may generate. Horizon sells their energy through a contract with the Ontario Power Authority to OPG who then sells it to TBH. In short, everyone who buys power in Ontario will be paying for all the green energy projects. It will be a blended rate that we all will pay across the province not just in TBay.

Does that make you feel better or worse about the deal?
Just asking.
10/12/2010 8:30:50 AM
windphart says:
Hey Wayne;
Read past the second paragraph before you start shooting your mouth off. Usually, journalists identify who they're interviewing at the beginning of the article. :)
Speaking for Thunder Bay is YOUR interpretation dude. She's representing the NMEPC. Look it uop.
Hey there's councillors without degrees or proper credentials but you seem to be ok with letting them speak for you.

One more thing about tonight's meeting. Their contract states that they have the right to specify the location of turbines provided their in a viable location. No one on either side has provided what is "viable". Therefore, they can't be sued (if they ask them to move), if Horizon hasn't provided them with a proper business plan that show a loss should they move.

Sounds like an easy solution to me.

Move them back, get the project moving. Supporters happy, opposers get their compromize.
10/12/2010 8:47:26 AM
george2000 says:
anyone see today's editorial.

this paper should be fined if possible, or the entire city should cancel its subscription.

if saturday's comments about Marina were not enough, not the editorial says the city did everything right on this project and now it is up to the province to decide.

Incredible.

This attempt to influence the election is almost communism.

they are an embaressment to journalism. The national enquirer is better than these guys.

I hope this get's posted.

this should be the new topic for discussion this election.

the attempts by our newspaper to take over an election.

fortunately this site and the source exist to have a little balance in a discussion.
10/12/2010 9:40:24 AM
tbayguy009 says:
If I could use a movie quote:

'Would you tell me please, Mr. Howard, why should I trade one tyrant three thousand miles away for three thousand tyrants one mile away? An elected legislature can trample a man's rights as easily as a king can.' From The Patriot.

Why is it that when people are in opposition something, government supporters find it so offensive. Small groups of government, with lobbiest's and big business at their side change the very nature of people's lives. Why is that, not a concern by people 'watching' this fiasco unfold before their very eyes!

Locally affected people opposed this 200 to 2 at meetings. Under heavy security and monitoring. Others want to tell them that they have no rights? I, myself, would not know how to call that democracy by any means.

One other thing that Thunder Bay is leading this country in, is the number of civil servants per capita. The effect is clearly not in the interest of the people they are supposed to serve.

BTW Since I mentioned Kakabeka earlier. I would like to note that there is a capacity there of 21 MW. Yesterday their output was 4 MW. Why? One of 2 reasons. They couldn't produce more .... OR the area did not need the power. But someone please ask that question? Blast a road up a mountain, force Tbay Hydro to build more transmission lines, piss the local people off and ruin a tourist area. Then, after all this, just call it progress.

When they came for the Catholics, I did not care, for I was not Catholic.
When they came for the Prodistants, I did not care, for I was not Prodistant.
When they came for the Jews, I did not care, for I was not Jewish.
When they came for me, there was no one left to help me.
10/12/2010 10:38:10 AM
jp says:
all it means is that a few people try to speak for the whole city I guess you think the ski hill lokks nice
10/12/2010 11:32:31 AM
sam says:
I still cant understand why some people are still asking why we need to develop wind farms. The people who run Google, who are probably some of the smartest people on the planet, have recently invested alot of money in offshore wind farms in the Atlantic ocean. It is clear that in the future, wind energy is going to be huge. So, I am very pleased that our city is taking its first steps into the wind energy future.


10/12/2010 12:26:52 PM
windphart says:
George2000; Agreed. It's pathetic. Also, their coverage backing Peterson is embarassing to say the least.

A paper is supposed to be non-partisan and unbiased. It doesn't take a political scientist or a Wind expert to figure out the paper's stance. Don't think the public isn't aware of this either. The industry is already hurting....you need to hang on to any subscriber you have. Don't give them another reason to look for something else.
10/12/2010 12:57:20 PM
george2000 says:
windphart, I am still shocked at this thing.

I am also shocked at the lack of comments about it.

This alleged newspaper is trying to take over the election. I do hope you are right about the public getting it on this issue.

This newspaper has its own agenda, whatever that may be.

It is disgusting to think that the electorate should be exposed to this daily.

the paper is privately owned and there is nothing we can do about that rag, but to have Greg Alexander publicly put out these comments in the middle of a campaign must violate some type of regulation somewhere.

Anyone have any ideas?????

because that is certainly an attempt to influence the vote and our national enquirer is going right along with it.
10/12/2010 1:50:48 PM
windphart says:
Sam;
Get with the program....do you see anyone on this forum saying we DON'T need wind farms?

No.

The topic is regarding the PLACEMENT of the windfarms. Google is smart. Offshore is a great location to put wind farms. You don't see them next to their beautiful palm-treed Mountainview Calif. head office, do you?
10/12/2010 1:57:42 PM
tiredofit says:
Sam, you answered your own question: it's off shore, away from residential areas. No one is disagreeing with you at all, we aren't aginst this project/techonology as a whole, just the way it's been handled by the city and the way the company has treated the residents.
10/12/2010 2:11:01 PM
Peng says:
RE stopthehandouts says:
"And as far as the noise...lol the wind powering the turbines makes more noise than the turbine its turning"
???????????????????????????

I suppose the lol means your joking right??

These turbines produce 105 + dB, along with tonal noise at the best of times.

That is not background noise

As the blades become damaged over time, and the turbines and gearing wears the noise only increases

Unfortunately sound studies require only the assumed lowest noise, instead of a reasonable estimate of the noise production over the life of the project.

THis project has been misrepresented all along by Horizon (and most wind farm companies) by using photoshopped pics, misleading statistics and wrong info

These are INDUSTRIAL power production facilities, with 330 foot towers , with 120 foot blades, with extreme levels of noise. The area around them will be fenced off and identified as no trespassing zones.



10/12/2010 2:23:47 PM
67mike says:
The problem with these wind and solar farms is: Dalton and his cronies have agreed to pay ASTRONOMICAL rates to the developers for the next 20 years! For example....hydro (dam) power produces electricity (green at that!) for 1.2 cents per kilowatt hour....do you realize the government has got US (hydro ratepayers) LOCKED into paying 13.5 cents per kilowatt hour to these wind farms! Solar is over 50 cents per kilowatt hour!!!!!! It does not take a rocket scientist to see that we are going to pay dearly for this power..so is any business that...what will this do to help our mills and attract new business??? Think People.
10/12/2010 3:05:05 PM
DoubleJInsurance says:
The potential for devastating effects on the poulation are at hand. Correlational studies have shown that since turbines have been put up a rash of cancer has spread through neighbouring communities like cancer. A good idea might be to purchase life insurance if youre near these monsters.
10/12/2010 3:51:09 PM
Gord says:
sam - People are investing in wind energy because it is a highly subsidized cash cow, not for of any other reason. Please dont make your decisions based on the ability to generate revenue, or next you may be supported drug dealers, etc.
10/12/2010 4:25:07 PM
publicdomain says:
It's unfortunate that the people who are deciding that we need a wind farm have probably never seen one personally, have never heard the noise that they make and will probably never have one in their "own" back yard. Go somewhere and see 20 in a row, listen to the noise, and spend sometime looking around for wildlife before you decide what "we" need and should have! I think anyone would be surprised.

I'm not opposed to wind as a form of energy, but I think its wrong that it is an issue that is being forced upon us. Wind farms shouldn't interfere with the view, with wildlife, property values or anything else and I strongly suspect that they will affect all of those and others.

The wind farm should be located away from any residential or tourist area. Why not utilize the great lakes off shore??
10/12/2010 6:31:21 PM
themantis54 says:
Everyone makes a big fuss about renewable wind energy, but want to fight for a pollution spilling mill to come back to life? Priorities are not personal, this should be environmental
10/12/2010 10:04:28 PM
CGA says:
Then move - Those who disapprove are probably the same loud mouth hypocrites which bark and complain regardless of which form they use for energy production. This is the greenest meathod possible. Off shore? Well then boaters etc. etc. are going to have issues. Sorry, not everyone can be happy! How else do you plan to make a spinning free turbine pretty? It is actually a very interesting site - coming from sault ste.marie. Grow up people.
10/12/2010 10:27:53 PM
Gord says:
Are people watching channel 10 to see Council debating this issue. Please watch asap to see who is making your decisions and what they are saying. lord help us
10/12/2010 10:57:14 PM
windphart says:
CGA...great observation. Sault Ste. Marie is a great example. Their farm is miles out of the city and out of the way of people. Glad you agree!
10/13/2010 12:59:40 AM
jvanderhooft says:
People need to relelize that is going to affect all of thunder bay not just the people who live around them. These thing will be in my front window, but we don't need them!!!! Are coal plant is only running at 2% we are already maxed out on send power. This is going to decrease my house value and never mind the health issues that come with them. People need to get their info right and learn their facts just because the are green dosnt mean there good!! Wake up people and fight back
10/13/2010 1:29:53 AM
tiredofit says:
I commend the 5 that stood up to administration last night! They see this for what it really is. At least they added the option that Horizon can't start a single thing until ALL approvals are in place. They had planned on starting road development as early as November 2010. All the city had to do was simply agree to the lease and disagree to the locations, not a real difficult thing to do.
10/13/2010 7:19:42 AM
tbayguy009 says:
There was another page showing the results of the vote and who voted which way. It seems it has been taken down. Or am I just having technical diffictulties. Isn't that just, just ... like the media here. Everything needs to be secret. No wonder why people facebook and twitter and text. At least there people can have a say.
10/13/2010 10:04:36 AM
Leith Dunick says:
Wrong story tbayguy009. This one was from Friday.

But for clarification, Bentz, Rydholm, Pullia, Ruberto and Virdiramo voted against.

Foulds, Peterson, McKinnon, Giertuga, Tuchenhagen, Johnson and Angus voted in favour.

Hebert, due to conflict of interest, abstained, and in fact was not at the meeting.
10/13/2010 11:34:24 AM
Comments for this story are semi-moderated. Read our comment guideline.

Add a new comment.
You must log in to add comments.
Create a new account
Forgot password?
Log In
 
 
© 2013 Dougall Media.