Jack Simpson – Cover Your Eyes “commercially sensitive” information about the Exhibition Turbine is about to be disclosed…
I’ve updated this post to correct the previous numbers I was using. It was five years of data, not four making the output even worse than before. See corrections below.
Guildwood residents asked repeatedly about success of the Toronto Hydro Wind Turbine on the Exhibition grounds (another waterfront location). They asked whether the output data would be considered as part of the wind study for the proposed massive industrial wind turbine generating station Toronto Hydro Energy Services wants to place in the bluffs. Jack Simpson, Vice President of Generation repeatedly stated that the data as far as output was concerned at the Ex was ‘commercially sensitive’ and could not be shared. I now know why.
Perhaps he should have told someone at Toronto Hydro Corporation that before they wrote about it in the 2007 financial statement… I want to thank the Guildwood resident who brought this to my attention and crunched some numbers that I have since verified and am now about to report. I knew there had to be problems when one shareholder refered to the project as “orphaned and dying” and that the Dutch company that built it had gone bankrupt causing some difficulties as well.
Page 42 of the 2007 Toronto Hydro Financial Statement states: “TH Energy/WindShare wind turbine at Exhibition Place has produced approximately 4 million kWh of green energy since 2003. Sounds impressive right? Sure, except that capacity over those same four five years was 26.3 32.9 million kWh hours (750KWh x 24 hours per day x 365 days per year x four 5 = total four year capacity), meaning the TH Energy/WindShare wind turbine (a project Joyce McLean was instrumental in and appears immensely proud of) has a four year average operating output that represents 15% 12% capacity. That output number is the one Simpson refused to disclose and said was ‘commercially sensitive’. A little math makes it clear it was closer to being ‘commercially humiliating’ than it was to being ‘commerically sensitive’. It appears the Toronto Hydro wind turbine that is literally right on shore is in fact worse (I didn’t even think this could be possible) than the Pickering Wind Generating Station on the other side of Toronto.
So we have two installed wind turbines that are right on the shoreline, both have horrible multi year returns. Toronto Hydro Energy Services has repeatedly stated neither of these count toward their study or consideration though. Just like the independent offshore wind report conducted by Helimax, who excluded this entire section of the lake as being non-viable because it didn’t meet the minimum wind thresholds, isn’t worth considering. The Canada Wind Atlas, a document the Ontario Power Authority actually tells wind turbine developers to consult, has also been ruled out as a source of information on wind viability off the Bluffs (it also agrees with Helimax, that there just isn’t the wind to warrant a project here). What’s more, the Ontario Power Generation failed experiment at Pickering admitted that ‘a lack of consistent strong winds at the Pickering Site’ is in large part to blame for a lack of energy production.
So, the Canada Wind Atlas is no good, the Helimax Report isn’t either. The two examples of such projects don’t count either… all that appears Toronto Hydro Energy Services wants to count is their Anemometer test, something they are in the process of trying to receive permission to install, while Simpson and McLean defy generally accepted scientific methodology and refuse to present a minimum threshold for success before conducting the experiment. Simpson isn’t even sure there is enough wind to power a little anemometer and a couple of navigation lights with three small scale wind turbines. Remember, these are the guys who can’t even mail a notice without extreme difficulty.
I think Toronto Hydro Energy Services has spun so far out of reality that they need to be reined in by the powers that be. This project is simply so far from being remotely credible it cannot be allowed to proceed even to the test phase. It is clear there is not enough wind out there. Two independent, unaffiliated reports state that, and two failed wind turbine projects confirm that cold, hard reality. Why do we need to drop another million bucks so that these guys can try denying those findings and push for a massive project that will see them try building on the Bluffs. They won’t even recognize that even underwater, the Bluffs are still the Bluffs (the underwater portion is both the base of the Bluffs and the result of erosion. It is not a stand alone feature).
These guys need to find something better to do with their time than flog a project without merit in a community that after watching the performance of Toronto Hydro Energy Services over the last six months, simply cannot trust or believe anything they have to say. There too many factual errors and omissions, convenient mistruths and, what is even worse, dirty tricks played on Guildwood residents to allow this process to proceed.
This is the opportunity for Toronto Hydro Corporation, the City of Toronto or one of about four different Provincial Minister’s or the Premier to step in and provide the required adult supervision to tell these guys that this project has already gone off the rails and needs to now be put to bed.
Guildwood is fired up and won’t be backing down. Toronto Hydro Energy Services needs to apologize and move on.
Tags: AECOM, Anemometer Lake Ontario, Exhibition Place Turbine, Guildwood, Guildwood Wind Farm, Jack Simpson, Joyce McLean, Pickering Wind Generating Station, Scarborough Bluffs Wind Farm, Toronto Hydro, Toronto Hydro Energy Services, Toronto Hydro Offshore Wind, Toronto Hydro/WindShare Turbine, Toronto Wind farm, Ward 43


January 26th, 2009 at 6:59 am
The commments about Toronto Hydro hold true for Canadian Hydro as well. The viability of industrial scale wind projects would be laughable if it wasn’t for our tax and electricity bill money paying for a lot of it.
Add to that lunacy the people suffering health effects of turbines in silence because wind companies and government deny there is any problem with that as well.
January 27th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Hey John,
Forget the turbines, they should just put you offshore because with all the wind you’re generating you could power this whole province!
January 27th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Anne Mometer, (clever)
Your phoney name is wise, but you’re insult doesn’t make sense…
I’m glad you agree that Toronto Hydro Energy Services should forget putting turbines offshore.
I am mildly alarmed though that you think wind without turbines is able to produce usable power. I hope you’re in the process of patenting just how this works.
I would expect the exhale of an adult male would provide superior wind speed, strength and consistency to the proposed site and think it’s wonderful that you agree.
In all seriousness, this is a project without merit and if the best you can come up with to respond is a snide comment, you merely prove the point. I am attacking the project, you’re attacking me.
January 27th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Curious who Anne Mometer is? Visit http://laforet.ca/2009/01/27/who-is-anne-mometer/
January 27th, 2009 at 7:59 pm
Great post, John!
February 7th, 2009 at 8:55 am
Last July, CanWEA (Canadian Wind Energy Association) Vice President of Policy Sean Whittaker says there’s nothing wrong with a little healthy cynicism; it keeps developers honest. In the end, the truth will always out, he says. – From Renew Magazine July 2008
Looks like you got the truth out, John, because CANWEA is not denying your data.
March 1st, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Now if the people of Essex County would read your blog I’m sure they would be alarmed on just how bad wind turbines are and how much it’s going to cost us.The Ontario Government has not told us the truth about wind turbines and how much they pay to subsidize the operation on how poorly they supply power.
March 20th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
[...] little bit on the toronto offshore wind farm and the Hélimax study Many people (such as 1, 2, 3, 4) cite the Hélimax study Analysis of Future Offshore Wind Farm Development in Ontario [...]