[ 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 project opponents can testify at tribunal  

Credit:  By Elliot Ferguson, Kingston Whig-Standard | Friday, December 18, 2015 | www.thewhig.com ~~

STELLA – The group fighting a proposed wind energy project on Amherst Island is claiming a small victory in its appeal to the Environmental Review Tribunal.

The ruling could stall the tribunal hearings for almost three months.

Algonquin Power’s subsidiary Windlectric Inc., the company proposing to build about 26 wind turbines on the island, had filed a motion to have testimony from witnesses supporting the appeal excluded from the hearing.

The company asked that statements from seven witnesses called by the Association to Protect Amherst Island be excluded, but on Monday the tribunal ruled the testimony would be included.

In response, the company’s lawyers advised the tribunal that it would not have witnesses available for scheduled hearings later this month.

The tribunal, which held hearings in Bath and Toronto last week, resumed Thursday and Friday and continues on Dec. 21 and 22.

“It might be postponed until March,” said association spokesperson Michele Le Lay. “The approval holder took for granted that these hearings would be done by the end of this week.”

Le Lay said the company had arranged enough witnesses to counter any testimony offered in support of the association’s position.

The testimony the company had sought to be excluded included statements about the health and environmental effects of wind turbines. The testimony the company was seeking to have excluded included two statements from epidemiologist Dr. Carl Phillips and a statement from biologist Dr. Christina Davy.

The tribunal ruling also allowed statements from five other witnesses but limited two of those witnesses to evidence related to the habitat of the Blanding’s turtle or bats.

The association’s whole appeal is based on the argument that the wind energy project would cause “serious harm to human health” or “serious and irreversible harm to plant life, animal life or the natural environment.”

Source:  By Elliot Ferguson, Kingston Whig-Standard | Friday, December 18, 2015 | www.thewhig.com

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.