[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Council talks out of both sides of its mouth 

Credit:  By Andrew Dreschel, www.thespec.com 17 November 2011 ~~

City councillors are asking the provincial government to do what they say, not what they do.

In a move some believe sends a laughably mixed message, council has voted 11-5 to lobby the Ontario government to lift its province-wide moratorium from offshore wind energy projects.

The request comes less than two months after council slapped its own moratorium on new wind turbine developments within city limits.

Councillor Brenda Johnson, who led the charge on the local moratorium, says the new move flies in the face of the city’s own position that more studies are needed to prove that wind energy projects do not pose health or environmental risks.

Johnson points out that’s the very reason the province imposed a moratorium on offshore wind farms.

“How can we advocate the removal of a provincial moratorium when we have one of our own for the same reason?” Johnson said.

The answer is apparently simple: Jobs.

Councillor Judi Partridge spearheaded the vote that aligns Hamilton with the City of Kingston and a consortium of manufacturers and suppliers of wind power parts and expertise.

She says council’s support for overturning the province-wide ban is not a mixed message.

“My position is the message we’re sending is that Hamilton is open for clean energy business, and we need to send that message out loud and clear.”

Partridge says several Hamilton companies are ready to tap into an estimated $850 million in economic benefits from the wind energy supply chain, which would stimulate new economic growth in Hamilton.

“I don’t know why anybody wouldn’t support our local businesses,” said Partridge, who believes Hamilton’s own moratorium is “misguided.”

“I believe this motion provides us an opportunity to say, ‘Hey, we’re open for business.’ And as far as manufacturing wind turbines in Hamilton, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.”

Speaking in support of the motion, Mayor Bob Bratina says the city can’t turn its back on local companies such as Bermingham Foundation Solutions, which recently expanded in Hamilton after flirting with relocating elsewhere.

Bermingham is one of several local companies that are part of a growing effort to get the province to reverse the position it staked out in February that more scientific studies are needed for lake-based wind farms.

Ontario’s moratorium does not affect land-based wind farms.

Partridge and city staff originally wanted council to join Kingston and Windstream Energy Inc. in forming a consortium to promote the fabrication and installation of 100 offshore wind turbines in the Wolfe Island Shoals, located approximately 5 km off Wolfe Island in eastern Lake Ontario, near Kingston.

Windstream had the only feed-in tariff contract for the project.

But staff’s proposal was dropped after a number of councillors, led by Brad Clark, expressed concerns they were springing the agreement on them sight unseen and without adequate explanations.

The new motion directs the mayor to provide a letter to Windstream supporting the consortium and to work with Kingston to get the offshore ban lifted.

It’s open to debate whether or not council is being hypocritical here. But they sure seem to be speaking out of both sides of their mouth.

On the one hand, they’re against wind turbine developments in Hamilton; on the other, they want to profit from developments elsewhere.

At the very least, as councillor Terry Whitehead notes, the issue serves as a warning that council shouldn’t take policy positions before it understands their full implications.

Source:  By Andrew Dreschel, www.thespec.com 17 November 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 educational 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 Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)


e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share

News Watch Home

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


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky