[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind energy no panacea  

Credit:  www.stratfordbeaconherald.com 13 May 2011 ~~

Doug Fyfe’s letter to the editor, Wind Energy the Way of the Future, on April 23, contained many misconceptions. Perhaps Mr. Fyfe should do some research on his statements.

As a community member, I am opposing a wind project, proposed to be built within one kilometre of the village of St. Columban, where over 300 people will live within 1,200 metres of a turbine. Mr. Fyfe refers to the economic potential of turbines for a rural community. The Municipality of Prince Edward County commissioned an Economic Development Report in 2009 on a 100-200 turbine project (Google “Sept. 2009 Economic Development Report Prince Edward County”). The report states the project income will be $1 million- $2 million based on taxes and $8,000 per turbine to the lease owner. However, the losses to tourism, culture and heritage and property values tallied losses of $2.5 million to $40 million. The report states “1% to 10% change …, with the figure likely closer to 10%, or possibly greater”. Does that seem like good economic county progress?

Mr. Fyfe speaks of job creation. Dr. Gabriel Alvarez, professor of economics of King Juan Carlos University in Spain, found that with jobs created through “green energy,” Spain lost 2.2 jobs due to high costs and “the cost could be greater if the amount of lost industry that moves out due to increased energy bills is taken into account” (Google Dr. Gabriel Alvarez King Juan Carlos University, Effect on Employment). Another study, Worth the Candle by Verso Economics, a United Kingdom government research company, states that “policy to promote the renewable electricity sector in both Scotland and the U.K. is economically damaging. Government should not see this as an economic opportunity….” Verso Economics concurs with the Spanish job loss.

The healthy jobs “just like in Europe” that Mr. Fyfe refers to, has changed. The Netherlands has withdrawn from its Economic Union (EU) targeted agreement to produce 20% of its energy from energy renewables as wind, due to excess cost. Denmark’s state-owned energy company has stopped all on-land construction of wind turbines due to noise complaints.

Mr. Fyfe mentions that doctors and nurses support green energy. He must remember that in the 1950s, some doctors recommended Camel cigarettes. Times do change and discoveries do happen. Thus, over 50 municipalities have asked for a moratorium on wind turbines until health studies are completed. Furthermore, at the World Turbine Noise Conference of April 14, 2011, presenters “admit that wind turbines cause sleep disturbances and stress related illness” ( www.windturbinenoise2011.org).Dr. Michael Nissenbaum, a Maine, U.S.A. doctor, whose specialty includes the effects of sound on human tissue, says 10% of people in his research, living in close proximity to wind turbines become ill.

As well, the manufacturing U.S. Midwest causes 96% of Ontario’s air pollution. Coal-burning plants contribute 4%. To my knowledge, in countries that have installed turbines, no country has eliminated one coal-fired electrical plant. A reliable backup source of electricity is needed for unreliable and inconsistent wind-produced energy.

Find out more truth about wind turbines at www.windconcernsontario.com.Mr. Fyfe needs facts for his statements, not coffee shop talk. But, more importantly, we, the taxpayer should ask: “How can our household afford to pay 15 cents a kilowatt for electricity, the amount our government is paying wind companies?” And we need to ask, “Why does this government continue this flawed and expensive Green Energy Act?


Source:  www.stratfordbeaconherald.com 13 May 2011

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.