Posts Tagged ‘Anemometer Lake Ontario’
Through All the Hot Air: Some Truths About Wind Power Generation in Ontario and the World
Below are some quotes from experts with knowledge of the wind power industry who don’t work for a corporation that stands to make millions from a proposed industrial wind project off the Scarborough Bluffs. You’ll also find a snapshot of today’s electricity market, some facts about wind that you won’t find in Toronto Hydro’s presentation, and finally my commentary on the whole mess. I also coin the phrase “commercially humiliating”.
“The Ontario Power Authority, the government agency that effectively determines which large power projects live or die, says offshore wind costs too much to be considered in its 20-year power system plan. It acknowledges that the technology provides more power than onshore projects, but not enough to justify the higher cost of building offshore wind farms.” (Toronto Star, June 30th 2008)
“Offshore wind capacity accounts for almost 1,170 megawatts worldwide, roughly 1.2 percent of the 94,100 megawatts of installed capacity at the end of 2007; while this is a small share of the total, it is up from less than 0.3 percent in 2000.” (Earth Policy Institute, March 4th 2008)
“The increased presence of wind power on the IESO-controlled grid will contribute positively to Ontario’s future supply mix. The variable nature of wind will however introduce specific challenges to the reliability of the integrated power system. These challenges are magnified as the number of wind power projects that are connected to the grid increases.” (The Independant Electricity Operator, accessed January 22, 2008)
In 2007 industrial wind turbine operators in Ontario over forecast their output (read under delivered what they promised to the grid) 58% of the time. This forced unexpected imports and caused $186 000 in additional, unplanned, expense to the Ontario grid. Based on planned 2009 capacity, the same level of error would cost the grid a total of $866 000. (Data from Wind Forecast Error Impacts on Efficiency, May 14 2008 Meeting of the Wind Power Standing Committee, The Independent Electricity Operator) Incidently if the Nuclear, Gas, Coal or Hydro plants did this, we’d have rolling blackouts all the time.
The Pickering Wind Generating Station owned by the Ontario Power Generation reports a five year output average of just 18% capacity. Ontario hydro describes this output as being “low compared to other forms of generation and results mainly from a lack of consistent strong winds at the Pickering Site, as well as the high maintenance required for a prototype unit.” (Ontario Power Generation, Backgrounder: Pickering Wind Generating Station) The Pickering Wind Generating Station where the Ontario Power Generation reports a lack of consistent strong winds is literally right on the shore about two kilometres away from Toronto Hydro Energy Services proposed industrial wind generating station. It’s also 117 metres tall.
Both Jack Simpson and Joyce McLean claimed ignorance when asked about the Pickering Wind Generating Station’s failure to actually generate anything. I found this as the first hit in google by searching “Pickering wind turbine”. I know from viewing my web stats that someone at Toronto Hydro knows how to use google to at least find my blog entries relating to their project. Presumably they could google something experts have to say as well.
At 11am January 22th 2009 (the most recent data at the time of writing) Nuclear power was operating at 96%of available capacity and providing 10679 mega watts of power to the system. Coal power was generating 86%of available coal capacity and providing 3761 mega watts of power to the system. Gas power was operating at 44%of available capacity and providing 2104 mega watts to the grid. Hydro electricity was providing 71% of available capacity with 4478 megawatts being added to the grid. Wind power was operating at 10% capacity and providing 94 megawatts to the grid (available capacity is 903 megawatts.) (Generators Output and Capability Report, January 22, 2009.) This isn’t what is being used by the system… this is production.
The Prince Farm with 189 megawatts of installed capacity was operating at 0.5% capacity and providing 1 megawatt to the grid. The Prince Wind Farm is a $400 million, 126 wind turbine project is the largest wind project in Ontario and was the forth to open. Luckily for Ontario, this plant is owned by Brookfield Renewable Power. Brookfield Asset Management is the 100% shareholder in Brookfield Renewable Power.
At this particular moment, one would need to have an installed wind capacity of 37610 megawatts (approximately 6000 megawatts more than Ontario’s total generating capacity) to replace coal, which is currently providing 18% of total capacity. At the current wind output in Ontario, not even 100% of all the world’s installed wind turbines could power the province right now. They’d get about half the job done. I won’t even comment on what would be needed to power Ontario using the Prince Farm output rate right now.
Other Facts about Wind Power:
Zero industrial wind turbine generating stations are in urban residential areas anywhere in the world. There are simply no examples anywhere in the world of anyone building an industrial wind turbine generating station in an urban residential neighbourhood. The fact that the developer who wants to, publicly tries to discredit medical research around “Wind Turbine Syndrome” should be of concern to everyone.
Zero offshore wind projects anywhere in North America. North Americans are considerably more cost conscious than Europeans when it comes to government expenditures. The result has been significantly lower taxes and user fees. Electricity rates in Denmark are considerably higher than Canada. Offshore projects have a marginal increase in wind yield, but it does not cover the massive cost differential between inland and offshore projects.
Zero fresh water offshore wind projects anywhere in the world. Ocean water is not potable and therefore is not consumed by humans. Torontonians drink, bathe in, and cook with Lake Ontario water that is collected within the proposed wind generating plant site. The sheer size of these structures will see serious disruption to the lake. Consider the weight and what will be needed to properly secure these things in clay.
Zero manufacturing jobs will be created in Ontario by wind turbines. There are no wind turbine building facilities in Ontario. There isn’t even a foreign owned branch plant in Ontario. This would require turbines to be purchased overseas and brought to Toronto by freighter, providing little help to Ontario workers who’ve lost high paying manufacturing jobs in Ontario. I highly doubt 8000 moving parts made somewhere else will have any economic benefit for anyone on this side of the pond.
Zero of seventeen industrial wind turbine installations has gone through a full environmental assessment process. Considering turbines like the one in Pickering have a weight of 220 to 300 tons and Toronto Hydro would like to place sixty of these in clay deposits in the underwater portion of the Scarborough Bluffs, presumably the anchoring will result is a very serious construction project that would be closer to bridge building than turbine placement. We haven’t even talked about all the cables they will need to bury over the 25 km stretch and then back to shore yet either. Seems to me there is enough environmental concern to warrent a full investigation.
Toronto Hydro Energy Services is so confident there is sufficient wind power off the Scarborough Bluffs, regardless of what the Canada Wind Atlas, the Helimax Study says or virtually anyone who has tried to sail near the bluffs, that should they be allowed to install an anemometer, Toronto Hydro plans on powering the platform (something smaller than a fridge, but bigger than a bread box with a few navigation lights) with three small turbines and, solar panels. I wonder if Jack Simpson is brave enough to commit to monitoring the percentage of any possible anemometer staging project that is powered by turbines, compared to the solar panels he has also committed to utilizing to power the wind test? Perhaps that data would be considered ‘commerically humiliating’ and therefore not available for public consumption.
Some Final Thoughts and Comments
I do oppose this project. I think that part is clear. It was not an easy position to come to I have to say. I do not oppose renewable energy or measures to reduce our carbon footprint. In fact I have made a number of small changes to my behaviour to reduce my personal carbon foot print. As an example, this website is hosted by www.dreamhost.com- a carbon neutral hosting service. I’ve also replaced all of my light bulbs with the curly guys. Apparently that not only will save me money on my electricity bill, but CFL light bulbs also save 2000 times their own weight in greenhouse gases. I also turn out lights when I’m leaving a room and never leave any on when I’m not home. I also cut down on my “phantom power” by not leaving unnecessary things like my cell phone charger or lap top plugged in when I’m not using them, and using a power bar that allows me to fully turn off power to my TV and VCR when they aren’t being used. All really easy stuff to do to both save money and lessen one’s carbon foot print. I also don’t drive, and prefer walking to the TTC when downtown or within a reasonable walking distance of my destination. For a guy who isn’t even trying that hard, I think I’m doing ok.
I oppose this project because it represents some of the worst public policy I’ve seen in a long time. It lacks the kind of oversight that ensures both economic viability, and ecological sensitivity. The process Toronto Hydro Energy Services and the City of Toronto has employed has been exclusionary, misleading, at times factually inaccurate. It has also denied residents the right to control the destiny of their community, something that should be a right, particularly when a clear ‘greater good’ can’t be established. By that I mean there is no compelling reason why a wind project must be placed here, and in fact evidence that other areas are probably better. I could name 64 better sites for Toronto Hydro if they’d like.
The Scarborough Bluffs is one place to put wind turbines, sure. Cemeteries have a lot of open space too. It doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. Helimax gave the OPA a list of 64 offshore sites it deemed viable, after considering wind speed, local habitat, proximity to human populations, proximity to protected areas, parkland, wetlands and other important natural features. The Bluffs was not included. Perhaps not due to wind and perhaps because Helimax had the good sense to recognize some of the other limiting factors of a site that unique.
Joyce McLean and Jack Simpson can say whatever they want. They can pretend Helimax was not a comprehensive study as they have stated. They can challenge a paediatrician on her findings as it relates to Wind Turbine Syndrome. They can pretend not to know just how bad the Pickering experiment has gone. They can even refuse to disclose the data they collect with public money, for a public board that is solely owned by the City of Toronto and use the embarrassingly weak excuse of ‘commercial sensitivity’ all they want. The facts just don’t agree with the positions these wind farm developers have taken. They presumably will need their professional reputations when this is over, which is why I am perplexed as to why anyone would sell a project in the way they’ve chosen to. I know personally being able to look at myself in the mirror and know that regardless of what the day will bring I’ll get to go home with my integrity intact is something I value far more than a pay cheque. It’s too bad more people don’t as well.
13 Comments »Reaction to Toronto Hydro Anemometer Meeting in Guildwood
Before discussing the meeting itself, I would like to start by recognizing that Joyce McLean of Toronto Hydro was kind enough to credential me and Jeff Hume, who assisted with video footage of last night’s meeting as ‘media’. I genuinely appreciate her recognition of bloggers and citizen journalists as having a role in public debate and coverage of events. That part was good news.
For some background, this was the third attempt at a community meeting for Guildwood residents, and I have to say was executed better than the previous two attempts. In fairness, the bar wasn’t high considering the first meeting had to be cancelled due to poor site selection, and the second meeting was stacked by grant receiving supporters of Toronto Hydro who blocked residents rights to speak and shouted them down when they finally got the opportunity to. There were still problems with tonight’s format, all of which serious, some of which may have legal implications.
Toronto Hydro Energy Services is an unregulated subsidiary of Toronto Hydro. Toronto Hydro has one shareholder — the City of Toronto. The City of Toronto has 2.5 million share holders who have rights. The voters. Toronto Hydro is considered a ‘local board’ of the City and therefore must follow certain provisions of the City of Toronto Act or ‘a Stronger Toronto for a Stronger Ontario Act, 2005′. One of those provisions is to hold public meetings. That means doors open. Anyone can attend. I’m sure they can still restrict who speaks, just like City Council can restrict who speaks in the Chamber, but we’re all allowed to be in the Chamber. Legally for the purposes of a meeting like this restricting attendance is sketchy at best, illegal at worst. But they still did.
I spoke to a number of residents and found that all residents who received a notice received one dated January 2nd 2009. The notice had a pin number required to register (something you could only do during office hours) and one had to register by January 15th to attend the January 20th meeting. You could also only register two people. I only spoke to one resident who received a notice before January 15th, they had received it on January 13th and registered successfully. Most residents received the notice after and had to call Toronto Hydro for special permission to attend. There was no public notice to let residents know this was an option.
Chris Tyrrell, President of Toronto Hydro Energy Services, apologised for the error. It was a bit of an empty ‘sorry’ considering it was caused by a ridiculous process that is outside the law that governs meetings and likely caused many residents who either didn’t receive or didn’t read the unaddressed ad mail Toronto Hydro sent to them, not to attend the meeting. That means their voices weren’t heard. The National Post is nuts if they think 900 people were in that auditorium. It has a capacity of 960 and there were significantly more than 60 empty seats, even before the Hydro folks offended people, causing walk outs.
I listened to two and a half hours of questions. Not a single resident asked a question or made a comment that spoke remotely favourably of this project. If the slant of questions were considered votes, this would have been unanimous opposition. Toronto Hydro took a bruising from residents. Over the course of the evening the ridiculous non-answers of Toronto Hydro Energy Services staff, namely Jack Simpson, VP Generation, and Joyce McLean, Director of Strategic Issues dodged just about everything they were asked. I will have videos of some of this to follow.
Residents were only given one minute to ask questions, and frustration with the process got so bad on a number of occasions that residents protests temporarily took over the meeting. McLean and Simpson’s answers resulted in groans, mocking cat calls and other signs that residents simply could not believe what they were saying. Hundreds of residents left in frustration as the meeting continued on.
The answer to every question relating to what would constitute a viable project or requests for information about the wind turbine at the EX or the Pickering turbine were met with responses along the lines of ‘that information is commercially sensitive’. Read: so bad, we don’t want to go there. Although if we’re talking about bird deaths, Toronto Hydro can go there to defend turbines. They can also be used to cite experience with these types of projects. When asked if the data they plan on collecting would be publicly available, the answer was no. Because it is commercially sensitive. How you ask? Well that is a good question. Considering Toronto Hydro has already leased the lake bed they plan to put the industrial wind turbine station on, and only they can use their data for financing or throw up these turbines on that site. It’s an answer to a question for a guy who just doesn’t know what to say and is defending a project without merit. Last night that was the story of Jack Simpson.
McLean for her part, attacked research that suggests there is a medical condition called “Wind Turbine Syndrome” that affects residents who live near these industrial applications. She said the data and the forthcoming book, written by a Doctor isn’t valid because it hasn’t been peer reviewed. I’m sure Joyce’s point is really valid for all of those folks living near wind turbines all over North America with similar symptoms… According to Toronto Hydro, their Anemometer data won’t be peer reviewed either. It’s commercially sensitive, remember? Presumably they will try and convince us it’s valid though. She also minimized the bird and bat deaths caused by these things and tried to blame buildings for being the real bird killing culprit. I’m sure Guildwood residents would oppose building buildings off the bluffs too.
Toronto Hydro also tried to suggest that the portion of the bluffs under the water is somehow separate from the bluffs itself. In fact this is the erosion materials from the cliff face and the base of the whole formation. They are one. In fact, I would challenge Jack Simpson who disagrees on this point to get a Geologist to test the materials on the sand bar and compare them to the cliff face. Short of being wet, they are the same. Drilling into one, will cause vibrations and could cause major erosion. I’m not an engineer, but not being an idiot seems like enough to know this will be the case.
Toronto Hydro continues to use deceptive claims when trying to sell the industrial wind turbines we’re not allowed to talk about at meetings. The presentation focused on Denmark’s offshore projects and the fact that Germany has 23 000 megawatts of installed wind energy. Can anyone guess how many offshore wind farms Germany has? – Zero. How many urban wind farms? – Zero. Ok. Moving on to Denmark… Denmark has both, but how many are in residential areas? – Zero. None. Not One. Anywhere in the world is there a wind project in front of a cliff? Nope. No where. This is a completely new idea.
Here is another fun piece of trivia: How many full environmental assessments have actually been done before wind turbine projects have been built in Ontario? HINT: There have been 17 wind projects. Answer? Are you sure you want it? Here goes: Zero. Who needs an environmental assessment when the project has ‘green’ in the title.
Toronto Hydro also likes to talk about coal power and McGuinty’s promise to close all coal power plants by 2014. – Not only will I predict this won’t happen on time, and should McGuinty retire or be defeated, it will probably be shelved all together. Even with 55 000 wind turbines installed world wide, not a single coal power plant has been closed because of it. It’s another bad argument.
I have to say, I was disheartened watching this process play out. It was clear watching the Toronto Hydro Energy Services folks and the local municipal representation that they are sitting there, going through the motions and just waiting to go to Natural Resources to say “see, we consulted”. They did a good job of sitting there, listening and ignoring. The note taker wouldn’t even copy any critical statements verbatim, the only verbatim commentary recorded were the remarks by Hydro officials. Anyone interested in producing a transcript can use www.laforet.ca‘s unedited footage of the meeting, but would need to contact me soon so an unedited copy is kept for that purpose.
I strongly believe residents have a right to control the destiny of their communities through collaboration and local democracy. This a core belief I have as it relates to the role of citizens in a democracy. Any process or decision that forces members of a community to organize and fight their elected officials who are complacent or working against them is the sign of real trouble. Guildwood has a Councillor (Paul Ainslie) who slept through this process early on and has forced residents to fight like hell to stop this. He sits on the Toronto Atmospheric Fund which cut a cheque for $100 000 for this project. He sits on Toronto City Council that cut a cheque for $150 000 for this project. How did residents of Ward 43 find out this was even under consideration? Not from their elected official who would have been involved in the process that saw these sums of money approved. Twice. They heard about it from Roy Wright. Roy is a Guildwood resident with unprecedented levels of energy and a deeper commitment to the environment and nature than most. He has spent much of his time in Guildwood fighting to preserve the natural beach below his home. He has probably talked to thousands of people and organized his neighbours. Together they got every one’s attention. Roy should be commended, but he should not have had to do all that he has to ensure his community is given the opportunity to be involved in the decision making process. He and his neighbours should have been at the table from day one, and an integral part of any decision making process. Listening to our communities shouldn’t be another step, but THE step that decides what does and does not happen. Especially for projects like this that are hardly ‘musts’.
Over the coming days, I will release a number of interviews, and videos from tonight’s meeting. I don’t have a timeline on this, but there should be some news on this front in a couple of days. I don’t expect anyone in the traditional media will have the courage to call Hydro out on this process or the overwhelming opposition the idea has received (none did last time), and therefore I will devote a significant amount of my time to allowing residents voices to speak for themselves so their voices can be heard above the elected officials who won’t fight for them downtown and above Toronto Hydro Energy Services attempts to quell their voices.
Agreat website is http://www.savethetorontobluffs.com/ It is maintained by a strong group of Guildwood residents who are standing up for their community and want their voices heard. Take a look.
10 Comments »The Great Anemometer Debate
Toronto Hydro will be hosting it’s third attempt at a community meeting for Guildwood residents to discuss the placing an anemometer off the Scarborough Bluffs to measure the strength of the wind prior to the construction of an all out industrial wind turbine project.
The first meeting Toronto Hydro scheduled was sited in a church well outside of Guildwood on a rainy night, against the advice of the local Councillor. When twice capacity showed up they were turned away and the meeting was re-scheduled.
The second meeting was held in Guildwood but was stacked with bussed in paid organizers from organizations that not only had received grants, but also organizations that Toronto Hydro’s project page encourages individuals who are interesting in knowing more about the project and wind power to visit. Those paid organizers hogged the mics and gave impassioned speeches in favour of wind energy, while their diesel school buses idled outside (buses that literally mirrored a popular bus route from Kennedy Subway station). Guildwood residents who could not stand in line for over two hours, weren’t heard because of these individuals and Peter Tabuns who thought it was a campaign event for those interested in being the leader of the third party blocked them.
This third meeting is intended for Guildwood residents. It is being held on January 20th 2009 at Sir Wilfrid Laurier CI. The same site as before. The difference this time is residents need to pre-register five days before the meeting to attend. Easy enough right? Except Guildwood residents also need to supply a pin number they were to receive as unaddressed admail from Toronto Hydro. As of January 16th – a day after the last day to register some residents confirmed to me they still have not received their notices. Even those who did receieve a notice will only be allowed to register two attendees. This is problematic for multi generational families, families with adult children at home and homes with multiple families living at one address. Those who have not registered will not be allowed to enter, regardless of residency.
Toronto Hydro has said they will extend the time for residents to register, and that is fantastic, but they have not conveyed that message through the media, no press release has been issued to recognize their error and any residents who did not receive a notice by Friday likely won’t until Monday, making it still realistically too late for them to register to attend even if they knew to call and try anyway.
Some will defend Toronto Hydro’s decision to restrict access to the meeting only to residents of Guildwood. This is not a position I would defend. I would defend Toronto Hydro if they chose to allow an open meeting, but only allowed Guildwood residents with valid ID to put questions on the floor. The City of Toronto Act, appears to like my position better than Toronto Hydro’s too.
On the City’s website “Open and closed meetings of City Council, its Committees and local boards” the City states: “Generally, the City and its local boards are required by law to give notice and hold all meetings in public.” It goes on to recognize Toronto Hydro as a local board, provides an investigation process and then goes on to say the investigation process does not apply to boards like Toronto Hydro. Toronto Hydro’s reason for closing the meeting does not meet any of the provisions provided on the City of Toronto website.
Is a meeting public if notices are never received and people are barred from entry if they do not follow a process they were not empowered to follow?
I will be covering the January 20th meeting on a day when I hoped I would be able to celebrate the acheivement of President Elect Obama and the ability his campaign had to give a breath of fresh air to American grassroots democracy. But instead, I will be at Sir Wilfrid Laurier, with hundreds of Guildwood residents, hoping to see the community given the opportunity to share their questions, opinions and comments on placing an anemometer off the Bluffs. Toronto Hydro has said the meeting can and will only be just about placing an anemometer in the lake for two years worth of study at a cost of $1 million dollars, but the intent of Toronto Hydro is considerably more than just testing the wind.
If you are a Guildwood resident, you can still register, and need to call Toronto Hydro using the information on the notice you should have received in the mail. If you have not received the notice, you can call Toronto Hydro directly at 416-204-0153 to register. If unable to register, I would encourage you to show up to speak to officials directly about being allowed to attend the meeting.
2 Comments »
