Council blows past wind turbine bylaw
Central Huron council has defeated a proposed bylaw to regulate wind turbine use within the municipality.
Their decision came following a public presentation regarding changes to the bylaw by planner Susanna Reid, as well as input from several local residents.
The purpose of the bylaw would be to regulate turbines in the event that the current restrictions, referred to as “the orange zone” put in place by the Ontario Power Authority are lifted, leaving community wind farms able to connect to the distribution grid.
However, some residents in attendance raised several concerns regarding the impact of wind turbines on those living nearby.
Fred Dutot, who presented council with emails from other concerned groups in Ontario, including information from Dr. Nina Pierpont, who studies Wind Turbine Syndrome, explained that he’s not against the idea of wind turbines, but that he is concerned that the setback requirements, or minimum distance away from residences that wind turbines could be placed, as outlined in the proposed bylaw, weren’t adequate.
The proposed amended bylaw set the minimum setback to any lot with an area of four hectares or less, measured to the lot line closest to the wind turbine, at 400 meters. The minimum setback from recreational zones was set at 600 meters, while the minimum setback from urban zones and community facility or institutional zones was set at 1000 meters.
Local resident, Robert Budd suggested that the setbacks should in fact, be much higher.
“I’ve followed this process and right from the start I’ve been concerned with this 400 meter setback. I think that down the road they’re going to be deemed woefully inadequate,” he said. ” I think what’s happening here is that there are going to be an awful lot of people who are going to have health issues. We haven’t addressed the implications these huge megawatt turbines have.”
Budd also pointed out that a 400-meter setback wouldn’t protect landowners from being surrounded by turbines. “It’s not going to help those people who are stuck in the middle of three turbines 400 meters away…. you’re going to reduce that property value and make it worthless to people. Why are we not at least going to the 450 meters?” he asked. “Such a minimal setback really does nothing but serve the interests of the developer…. Please do what you can to preserve the investment that these rural landowners have.”
The issue sparked debate among councilors following the residents’ presentations.
Putting a five-year moratorium on wind turbine development and asking that the government complete a health study on the impact of turbines in the meantime was suggested as one possible course of action.
Councilor Brian Barnim expressed concern over the issue of the municipality’s accountability for potential health problems. ” I don’t like to see anything come to a stop, but somebody has to be held accountable…the problems going on in other municipalities right now, I mean the people with health conditions, the animals, all of the things that are happening… until the province takes some sort of position and stands up to the plate, I mean, they’re not around to help anybody in any of these municipalities that are going to get sued,” he said.
“They’re not living it, they’re not there. We’re guessing at distances. Nobody can tell us where stray power is coming from or why it’s making cows kick calves, the stuff that’s going on doesn’t make sense. And yet people go away from these conditions and they’re fine. So, we’ve got to look at this and say, there’s something wrong.”
However, councilor Jim Ginn said he has some doubt regarding the existence of health problems due to wind turbines. “If we’re going to request a health study. I’d like to see some documentation that there is a problem because anything that I’ve heard is just hearsay. I know guys in Coburn Township who live all around those things. I talk to them about it and I don’t hear boo,” he explained.
Councilor Alison Lobb said having a health study done would help put her mind at ease. “I don’t necessarily have a problem with them on those grounds but I do think that the province has a responsibility to do a health study and I’d feel much more comfortable.”
“There were references tonight to overseas and what they do. And I would have liked to know a little more about the setbacks there or in Alberta,” Lobb added.
Councilor Pamela Stanley suggested that some of the information required to make a decision regarding turbines could be collected locally from the Centre for Applied Renewable Energy, in Brussels. “We keep saying we’ve got to find an engineer and find consultants, You know we’ve got the renewable energy centre, and we can get the work done through there if we just put together the questions to be asked.”
Deputy Reeve Bezaire questioned the impartiality of the centre as a source of information. “One of the accusations leveled by the people tonight is that we’re getting our information from the pro-wind turbine lobbyists. Is that the kind of information we’d get out of Brussels too? Are they going to give us biased info because they’re quite pro-turbines?” he asked.
Coun. Ginn dismissed this notion. “I just haven’t heard an argument that makes any sense to me at all. And saying that you can’t use the information that’s supplied by the wind developers… Does anybody know where their drug information comes from? It comes from the drug companies. Everybody is doing the research on their own products and it passes through health Canada which peer reviews it and passes it or doesn’t. I mean that’s how the world works,” he said. “It’s not an argument.”
There are a number of benefits to allowing for the development of turbines in the area, according to Coun. Ginn. “For every 10 wind turbines that go up, there is a job created and certainly jobs are going to be at a premium in this area. There are rumours and questions about whether we might be able to manufacture some of the parts here.”
However, Coun. Barnim said that despite being decidedly pro-development, he couldn’t get behind the idea. “I’m pro development all the way. You say 1 job for every ten windmills, and it’s going to affect how many lives? If you can tell me that, and I don’t think anybody can. That’s why I’m saying make the province accountable. Make them do some studies that mean something,” he said.
Deputy Reeve Bezaire said that despite his own reservations regarding wind turbines from an investment standpoint, sacrifices are necessary in order to enjoy the lifestyle to which many are accustomed. “The fact of the matter is that we can’t move every hog operation, every energy operation, anything that might look, smell, taste or be offensive to any one member of the world to what, the North pole?” He said.
“I mean, the fact of the matter is, we all want to drive our cars, we all want to watch our TVs, we all want to eat bacon and sausage with our eggs and have a steak on the barbecue, and we all want a cold beer and the hops that goes into it. Sometimes when you want all these things, you’ve got to live with some other things. So, get on with it.”
Councilor Marg Anderson made a motion that the idea of a moratorium be tabled so that council can make the decision after more information has been gathered.
A motion to defer the bylaw itself, however, was defeated and council went on to vote down the amended wind turbine regulation bylaw.
The bylaw may be brought back at a later date, provided the majority of council wants to see it back on the table.
By Sarah McDonald
Jan. 21
Tags: Wind power, Wind energy
Some possibly related stories:
The copyright of this article is owned by the author or publisher indicated. Its availability here constitutes a "fair use" as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law as well as in similar "fair dealing" exceptions of the copyright laws of other nations, as part of National Wind Watch's effort to advance understanding of the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development. For more information, click here.
