Posts Tagged ‘NIMBY’
Does Premier McGuinty Really Support Spending $660 Million to Create 200 Temporary Construction Jobs?
Let’s face it, on a project that no wind expert to date thinks is going to be economically viable. And to think, a few days ago $24 Million spent on lawyers looked bad. Based on reasonable calculations, it can be expected that the proposed offshore wind turbines in Scarborough will lose a collective $310 million bucks over 20 years.
Want to challenge my facts? Call me names? Just read this first.
“He’s counting on the (Green Energy) act, of which few details have been released, to help create 50,000 jobs over the next three years and boost the amount of renewable energy feeding into the electricity grid to fight climate change.” McGuinty Vows to Stop Wind-Farm NIMBYists – Toronto Star February 11th 2009.
“Taking a swipe at those who oppose wind turbines off the Scarborough Bluffs, Premier Dalton McGuinty is signalling he won’t hesitate to foist “green” energy projects on communities across Ontario.” McGuinty Vows to Stop Wind-Farm NIMBYists – Toronto Star February 11th 2009.
OK – So the Premier took a shot at Scarborough, an area with six Liberal MPPS and three who represent the Scarborough Bluffs area.He forgets that Scarborough is the City’s pioneer in waste diversion and has fought harder to preserve the environment than anywhere else in the City. The Premier suggests his Green Energy Act will create 50 000 jobs by ending our democratic right to oppose bad government decisions and by stripping already non existent environmental controls.
Basically the Toronto Hydro Energy Services project team, led by Joyce McLean, did such a horrible job at responding to community concerns they lost control of the project and needed McGuinty to step in and use his position to dismantle well established democratic freedoms for force the project through to create these 50 000 jobs so called ‘NIMBYists’ were holding up.
Let’s look at the economics of the Toronto Hydro Energy Services plan and use facts from the Premier’s mouth, PACE Global Energy Services – an independent consultant on the proposed cancelled Long Island offshore wind farm, and Toronto Hydro Energy Services to figure out the economic impact.
First though some background. PACE was hired to look at the economic feasibility of an offshore wind farm off of Long Island. They ultimately concluded it was an economic no go, but in the process provided a methodology for determining the cost of offshore wind in North America. They pointed out a few interesting facts like “GE is the likely supplier of these off-shore wind turbines, but no turbine supplier is well mobilized to provide offshore turbines to the North American market.” (Page 7, Assessment of Offshore Power Resources, August 2007)
“Pace Global reviewed the cost estimates provided by FPLE. The cost of the wind farm alone is $5,231 per kW, while LIPA’s underwater cable and on-shore substation upgrade costs elevate the project’s costs to $5,634 per kW.” (Page 1, Assessment of Offshore Power Resources, August 2007)
Although the higher figure is probably more accurate, let’s use the lower figure to limit the room for folks who trash talk me to criticize me. — And let’s not forget the exchange rate.
“On 18 Feb 2009, 5231 U.S. dollar(s) = 6,588.97 Canadian dollar(s), at an exchange rate of 1.2596″ Bank of Canada Exchange Rate Calculator
“The goal, says Toronto Hydro chief executive Dave O’Brien, is to establish a 60-turbine offshore wind farm capable of generating 100 megawatts.” Hydro eyes new wind farm on Bluffs – Toronto Star June 25th 2008
There are 1000 kilowatts in a megawatt. There are 100 megawatts of capacity being proposed for this project putting the cost, conservatively at $658 897 000. That’s right. $660 Million dollars.
How many jobs does Toronto Hydro Energy Services think this will create? 200 short term jobs.
“Short-term employment of an estimated 200 construction jobs and long-term employment of skilled operators and maintainers.” Research Anemometer In Lake Ontario: Toronto Hydro Energy Services Oct 2008
Thats nearly $3.3 million per short term job created.
To create 50 000 jobs as the Premier would like to by ‘forcing’ communities to install poorly thought out wind projects like this, the Premier would have to spend $164 724 250 000. Yup. Over a $164 billion dollars.
So now someone is going to say ‘but the pay back, but the pay back’. Let’s pretend for a minute that the same folks who messed up with the Exhibition turbine (and who are running this project) don’t fail as badly as last time. Let’s pretend that instead of their pathetic 12% five year average output capacity they can match the 18% output capacity of the Pickering turbine. We’ll not use this opportunity to mention that these projects are bookends to the proposed offshore site, and that virtually all research indicates there isn’t adequate wind to meet the minimum viability thresholds or that neither of these will even pay back the original investment over twenty years.
At a twenty year (the length turbines last before needing to be replaced) output average of 18% (remember this is the highest output data we have for a project near this site), even before we factored in the cost of interest or maintenance the project would lose $309 478 120. That’s right, $310 Million. (This is based on the 11.08 cents per kWh rate Ontario buy’s wind power at.)
Wouldn’t it be smarter to do a full environmental review, to follow international standards for nature conservation and turbine siting, to consider all available data and save ourselves $310 million that can probably be better used doing virtually anything else? Call me NIMBY all you want, but if you think blowing $310 million bucks and doing untold damage to the environment because you were in such a rush to install a project without scientific or economic merit is a good idea, you’re not an environmentalist, you’re an idiot.
Once Again, I gladly invite Joyce McLean or anyone else at the Toronto Hydro Energy Services team to respond to any of the claims I’ve made here. This is a standing offer that has been in place for weeks now.
Just The Facts: Wind Power in Ontario and Europe
Below are a series of quotes from various sources I have come across during my research. I will summarize at the bottom.
The Role of the Public:
Greenpeace on Public Participation in Offshore Wind Project Decisions:
“Naturally, in a democratic society, public acceptance is vital to the ultimate success of any initiative.” Sea Wind Europe – Greenpeace
“Every wind farm will be required to seek some form of planning permission, and inherent in this process is affording the local community an opportunity to appraise and comment on a proposed development, or on a wider development plan for an area.” Sea Wind Europe – Greenpeace
European Wind Energy Association On Public Participation in Wind Project Decisions:
“Public acceptance is key for the future development of wind energy in Europe.” European Wind Energy Association
Dalton McGuinty on Public Participation:
“Taking a swipe at those who oppose wind turbines off the Scarborough Bluffs, Premier Dalton McGuinty is signalling he won’t hesitate to foist “green” energy projects on communities across Ontario.” Toronto Star - McGuinty vows to stop wind-farm NIMBYs
Bluewater Wind Power (Deleware Offshore Project) on Public Participation:
“We value open and continuing two-way communications. It is important to us that we know and understand each person’s concerns, questions and ideas. This understanding helps us to improve our responsiveness to the needs of the community, which in turn contributes to the success of our projects.” Bluewater Wind Values
NaiKun – BC Offshore Wind Project on Public Participation:
“NaiKun is committed to working with local communities to ensure that the project is designed and built in consideration of community interests.” NaiKun Community Consultation
Jim Gordon – President of Cape Wind (Cape Cod Wind Project):
“We at Cape Wind share our neighbors’ concerns for the environment—local, regional and global—and act accordingly. Our philosophy toward community relations is simple. Be honest and open, be a good neighbor, and safeguard our shared resources and environment.” Cape Wind – Being a Good Neighbour
Offshore Wind In General:
The Ontario Power Authority on Why Offshore Wind Isn’t In It’s 20 Year Power System Plan (June 2008):
“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)
Earth Policy Institute on Scale of World Wide Offshore Wind Development (March 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)
On Proper Siting of Wind Offshore Turbines:
German Wind Energy Association On Balancing Nature Conservation With Offshore Wind (Undated – 2008/9):
“Mainly for nature conservation reasons, most German offshore parks will be erected up to 20-60 km away from the coastline and in 20-40 meters deep waters. So far, experience of building such wind farms is very limited, hence higher risk attached make financing from banks more complicated.” (German Wind Energy Association – Future Trends: Offshore)
Bluewater (Deleware Wind Farm Developer) on Siting Their Project:
“Bluewater Wind’s plan to site turbines more than 11.5 nautical miles from shore removes them from close proximity to bird population fly zones. Nonetheless, expert ornithologists will conduct thorough avian studies before, during and after construction of the Delaware wind park.” – www.bluewater.com
Cape Wind – North America’s First Offshore Wind Project:
“The wind park will be sited on Horseshoe Shoal off the coast of Cape Cod. Hyannis will be over five miles away—and most of the Cape beaches will be further away.” Cape Wind Project Siting
Nai Kun (British Columbia) Offshore Wind Turbine Project On Siting:
“It is here, several kilometers from the nearest shore that NaiKun has secured a 550 square kilometer permit area within which we plan to build the first phase of our wind project, a 396 MW offshore wind farm, and future phases.” Nai Kun Project Site
Greenpeace Europe on ‘Buffer Zone for Offshore Wind’
“The 5km boundary was to reflect a general move by some countries to impose a coastal buffer zone for very large offshore wind farms on visual grounds.” Sea Wind Europe – Greenpeace
How Far Offshore Are Current 100 Megawatt Plus Wind Turbine Projects:
Denmark – Closest 5-15 KMs – Average 12 KMs (four projects)
Germany – Closest 100 KMs – Average 100 KMs (one project)
Netherlands – Closest 8-12 KMs – Average 16.5 KMs (two projects)
Sweden – Closest 10 KMs – Average 10 KMs (one project)
United Kingdom – Closest 7 KMs – Average 9 KMs (three projects)
Source: Offshore Wind Statistics January 2009 – European Wind Energy Association
Toronto Hydro’s Proposal – 2-4 KMs
Source: Toronto Hydro Energy Services, Stakeholder Anemometer Briefing
On Environmental Assessments:
Cape Wind – North America’s First Offshore Wind Turbine Project On Environmental Assessments:
“Cape Wind is committed to protecting the Cape Cod environment during construction and when the wind park is operating. Prior to receiving permits for construction, Cape Wind will complete comprehensive environmental studies for federal, state and local agencies, and provide opportunity for public comment.” Cape Wind Environmental Studies
Nai Kun Wind Development (British Columbia) On Environmental Assessments:
“NaiKun is strongly committed to the Environmental Assessment process. Through the process we intend to clearly identify any potential effects and propose appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures to ensure the project can proceed with no significant adverse effects.” Nai Kun Environmental Assessment [Nai Kun is subject to a Federal Environmental Assessment, a Provincial Environmental Assessment and a Haida Environmental Assessment]
Bluewater Wind on Environmental Assessments:
“We seek objective environmental reviews. Our experts conduct comprehensive scientific and environmental studies and analysis on all aspects of our wind park projects, and we welcome the input of all experts in the public discussion.” Bluewater Wind Values
Greenpeace On Environmental Assessments For Offshore Wind In Europe:
“It is noted that, when investigating a potential site, developers must consider in detail a wide range of constraints. Potential impacts, and their magnitude, are subject to in-depth assessment in both the Strategic Environmental Assessment and the Environmental Impact Assessment processes. The former is an assessment of government plans and policies carried out prior to their implementation, the latter an impact assessment carried out by a developer in support of an application for project consent.” Sea Wind Europe – Greenpeace
Dalton McGuinty’s Position On Wind:
Dalton McGuinty wants Ontario to be the only jurisdiction to install offshore wind projects without community acceptance and a process that allows for community participation in decision making.
Dalton McGuinty wants Ontario to place large offshore wind projects closer to shore than any other jurisdiction in the world.
Ontario is the only jurisdiction in the world that does not require an environmental assessment before construction of an offshore wind project. (The closest is a “proponent driven, self-assessment process”).
Dalton McGuinty supports a project that ignores the Ontario Power Authority’s 20 year power system plan and all available data on wind viability off the Scarborough Bluffs. The Canada Wind Atlas, the Helimax Report his Government commissioned, and the two waterfront turbines that act as book ends to the location (both failures).
Dalton McGuinty believes you’re NIMBY if you agree with Greenpeace Europe, the European Wind Energy Association, the German Wind Energy Association, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Deleware, Massachusetts or British Columbia all of whom support minimum setbacks from shore at least 60% farther than the Toronto Hydro Energy Service proposal.
Dalton McGuinty believes you’re NIMBY if you agree with The Ontario Power Authority, Helimax, the Canada Wind Atlas or the evidence from the Pickering Wind Generating Station and The Exhibition Wind Turbine data that suggest Toronto Hydro Energy Services project would not be feasible.
Dalton McGuinty believes you’re NIMBY if you want his government and his friends at Toronto Hydro Energy Services to carry out an environmental assessment like virtually all other offshore wind projects of this size in the world.
Dalton McGuinty believes you’re NIMBY if you expect Toronto Hydro Energy Services not to knowingly lie to the community, to hold a fair, open and honest consultation process and consider the community’s concerns instead of defending their project.
In truth – Dalton McGuinty doesn’t have an answer for why his government doesn’t have minimum setbacks, doesn’t require environmental assessments and why they refuse to accept science and instead of doing something about that – he bows to pressure from the wind industry and uses the politics of divison to create conflict among citizens in his Province.
Dalton McGuinty is wrong. He should be ashamed of himself and he should apologize to Guildwood residents for wrongfully singling them out in a poorly thought out speech in London. Our concerns are environmental and it would be great if the Premier could join Guildwood residents in taking the environment seriously.
10 Comments »
On the Conservative Payroll? NIMBY? Nuclear Lobbyist? Unemployed and Without a Life? No, Not Me.
All things above have been mused about me since my interview for the Toronto Star’s “McGuinty vows to stop wind-farm NIMBY’s”. I have since completed media interviews with Radio Canada, CBC French Television, and CBC Radio’s ‘Here and Now’ this afternoon. Unlike those who take shots at me, I have the courage to stand by what I say and have nothing to gain or lose by sharing them. For me it is principle, not principal.
To clear up each of the suggestions made about me in comments on the article or youtube videos of mine relating to the project, I will address each of these in order.
On Conservative Ties:
I am not and have never been on a Conservative Party Payroll. I’ve never voted Conservative, or supported a Conservative Candidate for public office. I have been on the Provincial Government payroll as a political staffer to a Liberal MPP and the little known Liberal Caucus Services Bureau. I have also been the President of a Federal Liberal Riding Association.
On NIMBY:
I am not a “not in my backyard” type. I don’t consider my backyard to be anywhere near 2-4 kilometres offshore. My friends in Guildwood aren’t NIMBY types either. It’s a nice label to throw around when you don’t have a response to valid environmental concern, I guess. Can anyone actually answer why Wind Turbines are allowed to do untold damage to the environment during the construction and operation phase without any government oversight?
The Nuke Lobby:
I’m also not a Nuclear Lobbyist. Probably not qualified – certainly not interested. I don’t even own a microwave. That being said, senior Liberal Party officials do have uncomfortably close ties to the wind industry and the political masters who set government policy. What’s more, they do business together. One helps elect a Liberal government and builds turbines in their spare time, the other shovels money out the door to pay for turbines without any oversight.
On Being Unemployed:
First. To suggest one’s employment status has any correlation to their right to participate in the political process is disgusting. We are far from the time when one had to own property to vote. With so many Ontarian’s losing their jobs this comment is particularly insensitive to those hardworking people out of work due to no fault of their own. Shame on you. Second. I’m not unemployed. My employment has no conflict of interest with the political positions I take. Franz Hartmann and Joyce McLean (two strong proponents of this project) both have questionable affiliations that compromise their ability to act in the best interest of Ontarians. Both of these individual’s incomes are tied to work they do advancing the cause of wind power. At least one senior Liberal has a conflict so bad, both the Opposition Leader and the Leader of the NDP have publicly challenged the government on it in the Legislature.
Not Having a Life:
As for not having a life – that is in the eye of the beholder I guess. I feel it is pretty well rounded, and certainly not something I will take advice from a guy who won’t name himself and seems unable to use proper punctuation. My friends can spell, save the occasional text message or blackberry error. They also sign communications they send my way.
My Community or My Party?:
As someone who has traditionally been a Liberal both in the card carrying sense and the ideological sense, being pitted between my community and party is not a comfortable position to be in. I joined the Liberal Party when I was 14. I came home from the hospital to Guildwood. Choosing between the two was not difficult. It was principled.
Some Other Thoughts:
If this the best the wind lobby can come up with, keep it coming. Your lack of courage is representative of the folks at Toronto Hydro Energy Services who read each of my posts but will not reply to my charges. I guess they are only comfortable lying in person. Incidentally, it appears my good friend Anne Mometer found some time in her busy day at Gartner Lee – an AECOM company and Toronto Hydro Energy Services environmental partner, to visit today.
For the record: I do not oppose renewable energy in principle. I do oppose bad public policy. I oppose attacks on our democratic principles. I believe there is merit to following well established international standards and don’t think we can forget key facts. I know the wind folks and government types don’t like facts because they don’t agree with their position, but they are what they are.
This is a bad bill. Premier McGuinty needs to withdraw the legislation and apologize to Ontario residents like me who have valid concerns that he has chosen to label “NIMBY” even though, my stance is identical to the Ontario Power Authority’s position on offshore wind and the Canada Wind Atlas agrees with me (or me with it) that there just isn’t the wind out there for this to make sense. It is highly irresponsible for Premier McGuinty to support anything that will stir heavy metals and PCBs into Toronto’s drinking water without an environmental assessment to give us a sense what that will do to human health. This is the same man who was responsible when it came to making sure Ontarion’s knew what happened at Walkerton, but appears not to have appreciated the message that water quality is critically important to human health. He knows better. It is irresponsible for him to allow for untold damage to be done to an area of the lake that has seen millions spent to restore fish habitat and preserve erosion. Seriously, what harm would doing an environmental assessment cause?
This is a bad idea. The bill is undemocratic. The community needs to stand firm and the opposition parties need to step up where our government has failed. Liberal MPPs with communities facing wind projects they oppose need to recognize the impact this could have on their careers and stand up in caucus and tell the Premier he needs to blink.
I wonder if who is working on the economic crisis in Ontario if the Premier is running around smacking the grassroots activists throughout this province? Perhaps this is a bit deflection for a guy who just isn’t sure what to do on that front?
11 Comments »
