John Laforet » Toronto Hydro

A Sunrise Ceremony at the Scarborough Bluffs with David Grey Eagle and Toronto Wind Action

John Laforet — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 17:55:53 +0000

I was honoured to join with a number of Guildwood residents, the leaders of Toronto Wind Action and David Grey Eagle for a sunrise ceremony to honour the Scarborough Bluffs – a part of my community that Guildwood residents carry in our hearts, and will continue fighting to protect.

For those of us who got out of bed on a Sunday morning, and made our way to the Guild Inn for 5:30 am to be witness and participate it’s something we will surely never forget. As I waited for the group to arrive, I wandered around the Guild Inn park and saw two rabbits having breakfast, and was surrounded by the sounds of birds singing. There wasn’t any human generated noise to be heard.

David Grey Eagle shared an important message that day and in the video below, one about protecting nature, our drinking water and our rights – all things under siege by our government.

We must continue to stand together and stand up to protect all that we hold dear, and speak for those who cannot speak for themselves. The impacted wildlife that live in the Scarborough Bluffs, the birds along our lakefront and the fish within it’s waters need voices and need to be protected from the irresponsible proposal Toronto Hydro has endorsed and the Provincial Government and our local representatives appear willing to accept.

Perhaps the most significant pledge I’ve made as the only Ward 43 resident running for Toronto City Council is my firm commitment to protect the Scarborough Bluffs, and the Lake from Toronto Hydro’s proposal and work with the Toronto Regional Conservation Authority to give Guildwood residents and wildlife restored access to natural beaches and a waterfront worthy of such a special place.

Below is a video that shows some of the most important messages David Grey Eagle shared with us that day.

Today Will Be My First Time at UTSC Since McGuinty Tried to Have Me Arrested for Protesting; This Time I Will Be Delivering a Guest Lecture

John Laforet — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 05:54:18 +0000

This time it’s to give a guest lecture to an Environmental Science class on the Environmental Assessment process. I am going to explore the flaws with environmental planning in Ontario, the process and the negative impact this has on democracy, the environment and project planning. These are essentially the beliefs I was fighting for when I organized a protest to meet Dalton McGuinty on his first visit to Scarborough since coming out swinging against residents when he announced a law to take our rights away.

We were fighting to participate in a fair and open process when we lost the rights to participate at all. The Green Energy Act also removed the requirement for an environmental assessment for renewable energy projects; in addition to denying local municipalities the right to issue building permits for projects or develop local planning controls of renewable energy projects, the roads, transmission lines and other infrastructure pieces they impact.

голова болит секс

What you will notice is opposition has strengthened since the Premier tried to legislate our rights away, and in Scarborough we’re stronger now than before he tried to have me arrested for planning a protest against his undemocratic, donor written attack on democracy. голова болит секс

There are consequences to denying citizen participation, ending environmental protection, outlawing local planning and gutting oversight. These are topics I have discussed publicly and privately since February and I am honoured to have the opportunity to deliver a guest lecture to an upper year Environmental Science class on these themes, especially on a campus where these views had me threatened with arrest less than two months ago.

The fact that I’ve been invited to deliver a lecture on this demonstrates there is a willingness within the academic community to understand the process failures that exist.

I’ve spoken to high school students about active citizenship, the need to participate in decision making and stand up for the things you believe in. Recently I’ve participated in thesis work by two Masters students exploring the cause of opposition to Toronto Hydro’s proposal, and another who was exploring the impacts of the Green Energy Act on planning, assessments and participation. It is clear this is an issue that isn’t going away, and one that I am proud to be continuing to push along.

Direct Message To My Readers At Toronto Hydro – I Will Comment On Your Illegal Application Later

John Laforet — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 14:39:26 +0000

‘Never fight a battle where your opponent has everything to lose, because if they fear the prospect of a loss that steep they have nothing to lose in doing everything possible to defeat you.’ – John Laforet

To my readers at Toronto Hydro who have visited over eighty-one (81) blog entries on http://laforet.ca since this morning (it is 10:38 AM). I am sure you’re looking to see what I have to say about your illegal application that John Gerretsen decided to sign off on this week.

It is still illegal, you’re still a cesspool for unethical behaviour, flagrant violators of law and Guildwood residents are angrier than ever before. I still have nothing but contempt for anyone at Toronto Hydro who stubbornly supports wasting $700 million dollars of public money, damaging the environment and building a project we all know (yes you too) will never generate enough electricity to pay for itself.

We will defeat you.

You should know, not one turbine will be going in Lake Ontario off the Scarborough Bluffs, and you’re wasting your time and our money persueing your misadventure off the Bluffs.

We will ensure there will be consequences.

We will respond, and it will be fierce. We’re in this for the long haul and will not allow a single turbine to enter the Lake off our shores as part of your illegal application, through your law breaking, lies and other dirty tricks.

You will be stopped.

David O’Brien has already retired, perhaps it’s time for Chris Tyrrell, Jack Simpson and Joyce McLean to walk the plank before the next round of Scarborough Vs. Toronto Hydro kicks off.

If I were to write a modern ‘Prince’ or ‘Art of War’ this would be a message, I would dedicate to you: ‘Never fight a battle where your opponent has everything to lose, because if they fear the prospect of a loss that steep, they have nothing to lose in doing everything possible to defeat you.’

Canadian Ministry of Natural Resources Has a ‘Gartner Lee / AECOM’ Moment and Gets Caught

John Laforet — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 03:59:55 +0000

Folks may remember when one of the resident asses working on the Toronto Hydro proposal for an offshore wind test platform at Gartner Lee / AECOM decided to use the name Anne Mometer to insult me on my blog, and was subsequently outed, giving me the opportunity to go after ‘her’ employer and their law breaking client – Toronto Hydro Energy Services. Actually – both Gartner Lee and Toronto Hydro Energy Services violated the law literally hundreds of times together (To Gartner Lee / AECOM and Toronto Hydro again – as this is totally provable, I would welcome any response your Counsel has in this regard – but because we all know you did violate law hundreds of times together, it isn’t actionable as it is simply a statement of provable fact.)

It seems there are still eco-bullies in high places who know so little about the internet they don’t get why their highly ignorant and insensitive comments get them in hot water. Natural Resources is probably the most inappropriate place for someone to be belittling an individuals moving and painful experience. As such, I hope the comment results in an individual finding themselves removed from the public service.

First read this post about Barbara Ashbee having to abandon her home due to the health effects of a poorly planned wind project, and then view the totally insensitive comment from some Ottawa based hack who could choose to help residents, but instead decides to mock them.

Below is the comment the cowardly individual from Natural Resources left.

Please let me know when the property comes up for sale. Since everyone claims that property values will decrese, I will expect a bargain basement price!

Not only does this person not know how to spell but I checked the IP address of the originator of this comment and lo and behold:

OrgName:    Natural Resources Canada
OrgID:      NRC-41
Address:    580 Booth Street
City:       Ottawa
StateProv: ON
PostalCode: K1A-0E4
Country:    CA

Author : (IP: 132.156.196.29 , 132.156.196.29) E-mail :
URL :
Whois :
http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=132.156.196.29

Here is the Wind Concerns Ontario post on this incident.

O Lady Toronto, though green ye be, Scarborough is greener far to see

John Laforet — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 04:34:36 +0000

This post is dedicated to Joyce Mclean and Jack Simpson of Toronto Hydro. Their unique mix of ignorance, incompetance and dishonesty has inspired me to write over 60 000 words about their illegal application, gutter level eithics and has seen a community unite in common purpose to chase them out.

The reference in the title is, of course, the famous response that saw Snow White chased into the forest by a Queen as shallow about appearing ‘fair’ as Toronto Hydro and the city is about appearing ‘green’.

Just as the Queen in Snow White was not as ‘fair’ as her intended victim - the eco bullies behind the plan to distrupt, damage and distroy some of the most lasting and beautiful nature that can be found in Toronto – are not nearly as green as those who stand and fight on the side of environmental conservation.

Scarborough as fought to preserve more green space and parkland than any other former municipality in both real and per capita terms.

Scarborough diverts more garbage from landfill per capita than any other former municipality. In fact a former Scarborough landfill saw hundreds of thousands of dollars and thousands of volunteer hours put to work remediating the site and capturing the landfill gases which are now used to generate 26,600,000 kWh or enough power for 2300 homes annually. This happened long before green was the ‘in’ thing and back in the days long before Joyce McLean sold out and when she was an NDP staffer at Queen’s Park.

Now even while eco bullies were slamming residents who opposed Toronto Hydro’s plans to hurt the environment while trying to build a meritless $700 million project that meets literally no international standards for proper development, and fails to even meet Ontario’s barebones environmental protection – Toronto Hydro came up with the ‘Count me in’ program:

‘Created by Toronto Hydro, the Count Me In Toronto challenge offers Torontonians an innovative and unique way to encourage energy conservation in the City of Toronto. The program will see Toronto’s wards competing against one another in a friendly challenge to determine which ward is the greenest!’ - Count Me In Toronto

Which former municipalities house the top five wards?

1) Scarborough

2) Scarborough

3) Scarborough

4) North York

5) Etobicoke

The best part – George Smitherman’s Toronto Centre ranks 43rd and 44th of 44. Clearly his constituents haven’t gotten the memo he attacks Scarborough for apparently not getting.

As I’ve said before – Scarborough is by far the greenest former municipality by any measure. Unlike the eco bullies and moneyed interests who stand to make serious dough through their environmental distruction in Scarborough – we do care about the environment, we do our part and we will continue to do so by opposing the illegal application Toronto Hydro Energy Services has put forward.

My advice for those who seek to tear down my friends and I who oppose this project – walk the walk. Look to your own ways first. Change your light bulbs, turn down the AC, walk, take the TTC, recycle, compost, plant a tree – and stand up and fight for the environment. I know the good people of Scarborough will continue too, and just as we’ve shown time and time again that we are more in tune and in touch with environmental issues – we will once again prove by defeating this bizarre and illegal experiment of Joyce McLean and Jack Simpson’s, that we do have a deeper attachment and a stronger concern about the environment than the double speaking, paid lobbyists who fund those who attack us, and the politicians who’ve sold us down the creek.

While organizations, professionals and politicians may sell their principles, ethics and values for a pay cheque – residents of Scarborough see a higher purpose and will continue to reach for it over the cynicism that sees others peddle faulty logic to defend illegal and otherwise inappropriate applications for projects without merit.

Finally – I would like to thank Toronto Hydro for recognizing how truly green Scarborough is, and I would like to encourage them to do their part by dismantling Joyce McLean and Jack Simpson’s illegal application before they do any real damage to Scarborough’s environment in their attempt to chase a pay cheque.

Update on the Green Energy Act, Toronto Hydro's Antics and the Great Work Happening on the Ground in Guildwood

John Laforet — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 02:38:04 +0000

Citizen’s Voices Will Be Heard But Will Smitherman Listen

It worked! There will be public committee hearings on the Green Energy Act. Residents from across our province sent emails to the opposition House Leaders telling them to force the Standing Committee on General Government to go out into the Province and listen to the real voices of citizens, and not just the paid voices of the wind lobby.

Setting the committee agenda is about the only place in the legislative process where the opposition has a majority. Folks from across Ontario called on the opposition to refuse to make deals with the government that would shut down our voices. Once again, both the NDP and PC caucuses stood up for residents of our province in the face of the ‘bought and paid for’ advice, the wind industry has provided the Liberal government through massive amounts of donations and their paid lobbyists.

As residents we now must take advantage of this opportunity, and head out to the hearings, send in submissions and tell the government ‘residents’ won’t lay down’. It’s clear Smitherman and his staff prefer listening to donors and lobbyists over the people of Ontario, and they will be out in full force trying to keep straight faces as they praise a bill they all but wrote. We need to join them and shame their lack of concern for the environment or democracy. Just like the oil industry, these folks are out to make a buck – regardless of the damage they do.

Toronto Hydro’s Latest Trick

Toronto Hydro Energy Services is without a doubt the most disgusting example of sleazy decision making I’ve ever witnessed. Joyce McLean and Jack Simpson have run such a totally dishonest process both they and Chris Tyrrell should be fired. McLean and Simpson have abused the public trust through absolutely unethical tactics, allowing the ‘affected public’ to be abused by their allies who receive funding from the same folks who fund their research. Chris Tyrrell has demonstrated he doesn’t have the guts to stand up to the bizarre, twisted and irresponsible actions of these employees of his – so he too must go.

For her latest stunt, Joyce McLean has decided to submit an application, she must know does not meet the requirements for the Class B Environmental Assessment, to the Ministry of Natural Resources in the hopes of receiving the permit to go ahead with the Anemometer before the Green Energy Act is through committee. Anywhere else submitting a factually inaccurate paperwork would be legally frowned – but at Toronto Hydro it’s just another day’s work.

We will prove they have not completed the steps in the Class B environmental assessment and we expect the Ministry of Natural Resources to stand up to Toronto Hydro and tell them they need to follow the law like everyone else and also run a fair, open, legal process. Guildwood is ready for a fight and is not going away. Should MNR accept the application, I promise to make the bureaucrat, who we’ve begun sending evidence to via registered mail, famous. You will know his name, where he works, and what we showed him prior to the decision being made.

Guildwood Takes Action

I had an amazing day delivering flyers to Guildwood residents, informing them about our community meeting. With a lack of political representation, Cabinet Minister’s attacking our community and Toronto Hydro lying their way through the process – we are standing up. I am thrilled to be working with dozens of volunteers who have been speaking to their neighbours about what is at stake here and educating each other.

Many are looking forward to a meeting where they can come with questions, collect information and answers and do so without a restrictive process, abusive paid eco-bullies like the ones the Toronto Environmental Alliance bussed to our last meeting.

Although it is horrible to see a community railroaded and treated this way, Guildwood residents are working together to demonstrate the real strength behind democratic ideals that is alive and well in our community. It is heartening to see so many residents out of necessity getting involved in the political process, to stand up for their rights where those who have been elected to do so have failed to.

What’s Wrong With Toronto Hydro Energy Services?

John Laforet — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 04:47:04 +0000

The folks at Toronto Hydro Energy Services have demonstrated epically bad judgement in a number of different areas. Whether it is their response to electrocuting Torontonians family pets, demonstrating an inability to appreciate their inability to manage and deliver viable renewable energy projects, or their latest, trying to lie to Guildwood Residents and the Ministry of Natural Resources to get their second soon to fail win project off the ground. Things appear so bad that David O’Brien, President of Toronto Hydro Corporation won’t even allow Chris Tyrrell, President of Toronto Hydro Energy Services, to speak publicly when his hydro poles are electrocuting small kids and killing family pets. Having seen Tyrrell address a community meeting, I can appreciate O’Brien’s decision, but still believe it demonstrates a problem with the organization.

I’m going to share some facts on each of these situations to demonstrate ridiculous levels of corporate irresponsibility.

First – Who is Toronto Hydro Energy Services:

- THES is a 100% owned subsidiary of Toronto Hydro Corporation, which is 100% owned by the City of Toronto. It is the municipal equivalent of a Crown corporation.

- THES is the unregulated arm that is supposed to seek out revenue generating opportunities outside of Toronto Hydro’s regulated business of electricity delivery.

- THES’ board is made up of individuals that also sit on THC’s board.

- While legally separate, THES shares resources and responsibilities with Toronto Hydro Corporation and functions more like a division than a company.

Now on to the issues:

1) Electrocution of Toronto’s small children and pets:

Toronto Hydro Energy Services is the proud owner of the electricity poles within Toronto. A lot of people would think it makes sense for Toronto Hydro to own the poles that deliver the electricity within the city right? Sure it does, but why would the unregulated arm that doesn’t deliver electricity own them? Simple – When David Soknacki was Budget Chief from 2003 to 2006 he was consistently unable to balance the budget (Shelley Carroll – current Budget Chief has been able to). Soknacki had all kinds of imaginative schemes to come up with the money to make it work and in 2005 one of them was to ‘sell’ the hydro poles for 60 million dollars in one year program spending. Here I should note that if anyone would like to lease the wires in my apartment – recognizing there will be zero return on investment, I can be reached at john.laforet@laforet.ca – Chris Tyrrell (President of THES) I hope to hear from you soon.

So basically the guy who controlled the City’s finances was short – and went to a company that is 100% owned by a company that is 100% owned by the organization whose money he was responsible for – and set a price to sell this important, but commercially worthless piece of infrastructure to. Sounds like the brain trust at Toronto Hydro Energy Services really knows a deal when it sees one.

And now for the bad judgement by Toronto Hydro Energy Services:

First dog reported electrocuted in November 2008. THES response? Fix the faulty wiring in the one location, essentially making the deaths of family pets the ‘canary in the mine’ approach to solving the problem. “The Toronto Humane Society yesterday blamed Hydro for not taking the risk seriously in the German Shepherd case, and said the company would have acted more diligently had the victim been human.” (Toronto Star, January 14, 2009)
Second dog reported electrocuted January 13 2009. THES response? “Toronto Hydro inspected the area for safety hazards and has deemed the area safe.” (CTV, January 13, 2009)
Toronto Hydro “deeply regrets” it’s role in electrocuting family pets, but assures folks the streets are safe for people because of our rubber shoes and two feet. (Toronto Star, January 14, 2009)
January 30th 2009 – five children are shocked. Toronto Hydro President David O’Brien suggests maybe parents should avoid hand wells with children, orders all handwells tested and replaced. It is reported there have been 140 reported incidents since November 2008. (National Post, January 30, 2009)

Toronto Hydro knew there was a problem. They received 140 phone calls telling them there was a problem.

Toronto Hydro demonstrated a total lack of knowledge about the possible dangers stray voltage has until a child demonstrated they too could be shocked. They chose to wait until a child’s life was at risk, and until it was “bad PR” to step in an do something. Even then, two of the PR folks were doing media interviews on the issue, not the experts. Perhaps this demonstrates an inability for Toronto Hydro Energy Services to appreciate, understand and care about potential health impacts they have on others. It certainly demonstrates a need for their image to be damaged before they spring into action. Disgusting.

2) Bad Projects:

The Exhibition Turbine was a failure as a project. Yet Joyce McLean and her far left friends practically pray to the thing. They told investors it would generate 1.8 million kilowatt hours annually. It has generated 800 000 kilowatts annually and will mean investors, even after twenty years won’t even be able to extract their principal from this project. Toronto Hydro Energy Services had a proper anemometer test at the exact site they built, made these projections and failed to get anywhere near their targets. When asked about it, they mislead and evade.

Now, they want to find some poor sap or saps with as much as half a billion dollars they don’t need to keep Joyce McLean and Jack Simpson busy blowing it on another failed project. This time, the project will ignore all legitimate scientific data available and rely on an anemometer test up to fifteen kilometres away from possible turbine locations to build. They don’t seem to know what they’re doing, and can’t seem to appreciate how bad their last project went.

3) Toronto Hydro Energy Services Lying and Misleading:

Toronto Hydro Energy Services has not consulted the Guildwood community about the proposed anemometer installation. They are planning to lie to the Ministry of Natural Resources this week and submit an application that can only be approved if they have consulted. The problem? I have a video recording of their proceedings and not once do they speak about any environmental screening or assessment as it relates to the proposed installation. They can deny this if they’d like, but I have demonstrated in past when folks lie and I have them on tape, I release it. Ask Paul Ainslie about that.

Instead of holding a public consultation, they stacked a meeting with lackies from organizations with clear conflicts of interest to speak in favour of a wind farm. The third attempt to hold a meeting was not a legal meeting. It ignored the City of Toronto Act which sets minimal standards for Toronto Hydro’s meeting conduct. Even then, they did not tell residents the meeting was part of an environmental assessment or screening, they did not talk about the findings of any screening or assessment and cut off community consultation after Chris Tyrrell promised to keep it open. They are using this meeting which had nothing to do with an environmental assessment to try and convince Natural Resources to say they did consult the community on this. It is simply untrue.

Even in their presentation, which is available on their website http://torontohydroenergy.com/pdf/Offshore-Dec-2-2008.pdf they don’t reference an environmental assessment or screening. It does have misleading information and full out lies contained within it’s pages. My critique of this can be found here http://laforet.ca/2009/01/27/cutting-through-the-crap-laforets-fact-check-of-toronto-hydros-community-presentation/.

I recognize the word ‘lie’ has a very precise meeting and misusing it can and sometimes does have legal consequences. I am certain enough that Toronto Hydro’s claim that their meeting attempts are community consultations falls under the definition of a lie, and is provable to be a lie. I am prepared to use this word to describe it and will stand by this claim.

Final Thoughts:

These folks are so bad at even the most basic aspects of their responsibilities there is question to their ability to even safely own hydro poles, let alone install major generating projects. The last attempt at wind generation was led by McLean and failed miserably. They are both lying and misleading as it relates to the community consultation process, and any claim that they have consulted Guildwood residents would be a ‘lie’ as at no point did they discuss anything relating to the environmental impacts of their project, nor did they disclose any actual research they had done on this front.

These guys are so off base they’ve entered the realm of lawsuit territory. If they killed my dog or shocked my kid, I would sue. Folks in US cities have won real money off of utilities. Normally I don’t advocate lawsuits as a way to deal with anything, but these clowns have demonstrated they have too much money on their hands and any hit they take would probably be better for all of us in the long run. They knew there was a problem, but waited until it looked bad to fix it. If I were an investor in WindShare, I would sue both Toronto Hydro Energy Services and Joyce McLean personally as she worked for both sides of that deal at different times. Working for two partners in a two partner deal is really sketchy. Kind of like being the President of CanWEA and developing a wind project while pretending to be remotely objective. As a citizen of Toronto, I anxiously await the Natural Resources decision and hope that they turn down their application on the grounds that it simply isn’t true that they’ve consulted, nor does their test appear warranted when all other research demonstrates any project won’t be viable. I am confident that I can place my trust in the hand of a public servant whose decisions are made based on a set of criteria and not politics. I hope the individual who will make this decision rises to the hour and makes the right, but difficult decision.

There will be an environmental impact of even the anemometer platform installation, and considering that all research suggests it is unnecessary to do this test, any possible impact, even if it is as small as killing a single organism isn’t worth it, considering there is no reason for the test. What’s worse, no one can say it looks like Toronto Hydro Energy Services has done any research on the impacts, and from their own words on the topic it appears they don’t even care. Considering they work for a company that doesn’t seem to fret too much about it’s role in killing people’s family pets, or electrocuting children, this probably shouldn’t be all that surprising.

Toronto Hydro Energy Services should be ashamed of their conduct all around, and Toronto Hydro Corporation should be seriously looking at a ‘cleaning house’ at THES in recognition of their complete and utter failure to manage infrastructure responsibly, to build a simple project, or to learn from their past mistakes.

As always, I welcome Toronto Hydro Energy Services to respond. I will give them as much space as they would like and the opportunity to a completely unedited retort to my claims here. And if they want, I will seriously lease them the wires in my walls too.

Cutting Through the Crap: John Laforet’s Fact Check of Toronto Hydro’s Community Presentation

John Laforet — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 12:14:13 +0000

I am going to go through Toronto Hydro Energy Services power point presentation to point out misleading statements made by Toronto Hydro Energy Services during their botched community consultation. Click here to follow along with their original presentation.

Slide Four: (Why We Support Renewables[sic])

“Renewable Energy is part of the solution; it is a mature, reliable technology which is cost effective.”

Reliable? really?

“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.” Source: The Electricity System Operator “Wind Power in Ontario

Cost Effective?

Wind generated power is bought by the Ontario Power Authority from wind turbine owners at a rate of 11.08 cents per kWh and sold to the people of Ontario at a rate of 5.6 cents per kWh (a loss of 5.5 cents per kWh generated).

To install an onshore wind turbine costs are predicted to be between $2000 and $2750 per kilowatt of capacity. Recalling the data from Toronto Hydro’s only wind generating project with a five year average output of 12% capacity, 8.3 kilowatts of capacity must exist for every kilowatt of output. The cost per kilowatt of output using the OPA estimate costs would in fact be between $16 700 and $23 000 for the last Toronto Hydro Energy Services wind project.

Source: Ontario’s Stand Offer Program For Wind Energy

Source: John Laforet’s Blog “Jack Simpson – Cover Your Eyes “commercially sensitive” information about the Exhibition Turbine is about to be disclosed…”

Moving on to page five… “Wind Globally”

“Over 94 000 Megawatt wind capacity installed worldwide.”

Really? On Land or Off Shore?

“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.”

Source: Earth Policy Institute

“Today Germany has 22 000 MW of wind capacity installed.

This is just slightly less than all of Ontario’s entire system capacity of 31 000 MW.”

Response to German Wind Capacity:

Germany does have 22 000 MW of wind capacity installed. 100% of that on shore. What is Germany’s take on offshore wind projects?

“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.”

Source: Future trends: Offshore – German Wind Energy Association

Response to Germany to Ontario Comparison: Germany is a country right? Last I checked Ontario is a province. The population of Germany is 82 million, compared to 13 million in Ontario. Germany has a population over six times, the population of Ontario.

31 000 MW represents 100% of Ontario’s energy capacity and responsible for providing 100% of Ontario’s electricity needs. 22 000 MW represents 7% of Germany’s power consumption.

Responding to the word “slightly”:

As for the word ‘slightly’‘. Ontario’s total grid is 40% bigger than Germany’s wind capacity. There is nothing ‘slight’ about that. Germany’s wind capacity provides just 7% of it’s total consumption, compared to Ontario’s grid providing 100% of it’s. There is nothing ‘slight’ about that either.

Commentary: If Toronto Hydro Energy Services cannot even recognize the need to compare jurisdictions of equal scales, how can they be expected (or trusted) to competently develop complex mathematical modeling to measure wind viability? Further if a ‘slight’ difference to Toronto Hydro Energy Services can include a difference of to be up to 40% of capacity how can any analysis by them be credible. Especially considering Toronto Hydro’s last project predicted an output of 2.25 times higher than the actual five year average for their only wind project to date. That was after their testing too.

Source: German Wind Energy Association: Wind energy in Germany

Page Six here we come: “Offshore Wind Globally”

“Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Ireland, England, Wales all have developed successful offshore wind projects.”

Response:

Wrong. This is simply untrue. Germany has not ‘developed successful offshore wind projects’. “The first pilot project, the test site “Alpha Ventus” with 60 MW in the North Sea, is expected to come into operation during 2009.” Incidentally, it has been sited 45 kilometres offshore.

Source: Germany Wind Energy Association “Future Trends: Offshore”

Clarification Re: Copenhagen Offshore Wind Farm

Copenhagen’s project is 1.5 times further off shore than the proposed closest location for Toronto Hydro Energy Services proposed wind turbine and is sited off an industrial part of the City that is not home to residential communities.

Clarification Re: Slide Six in General

None of the projects referenced are in freshwater lakes

One is an urban example, and that one is 2.5 times smaller than Toronto Hydro’s proposed project, 1.5 times farther from shore, and not being built off a residential area.

Page seven here we come! “Wind Energy in Canada”

“By the end of 2008 Ontario’s wind capacity will power nearly 250 000 homes.”

Response: Capacity doesn’t power a single home. Actual output does. Capacity at Toronto Hydro’s one wind project is over 8 times the five year average annual output. You invest in capacity, and are paid back in actual output. If all project developers failed as badly as Toronto Hydro Energy Services did on their last wind project, a province wide capacity sufficient to power 250 000 homes would power just 30 000 homes.

Source: Common sense. This is so basic it doesn’t need to be cited.

“Economic benefits include green collar construction jobs and more stable energy rates.”

Clarification: ‘More stable energy rates’? Really? I thought the Ontario Energy Board set every one’s energy rate at 5.6 cents per kWh for residential use, while the Ontario Power Authority purchases wind energy (when it’s available) for 11.08 cents per kWh? Stability comes from the Ontario Energy Board and the only impact wind power could have on energy rates is ‘up’. With an under delivery rate (delivering less than promised) of 58%, wind energy output is so unreliable it costs the system hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in addition of the actual paid cost for wind energy when it is available.

Source: Wind Forcast Error Impacts on Efficiency, Wind Power Standing Committee; the IESO

Source: Ontario’s Standard Offer Program – Wind, Ontario Power Authority

Source: Electricity Prices in Ontario – Ontario Energy Board

On to page eight – let the games begin: “Great Lakes Offshore Wind”

“A minimum of 34 500 MW offshore wind on the Ontario side of the Great Lakes has been identified as a significant source of new renewable energy capacity by the Ontario Power Authority’s commissioned study by Helimax in 2008.”

Response: Neat. Toronto Hydro Energy Services is recognizing the Ontario Power Authority and Helimax as industry experts and name dropping them to give credibility to their claim that this seems like a good idea. OK, so let’s see what else the OPA and Helimax said.

“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.”

Source: Toronto Star, June 30th 2008

OK, but there is still Helimax right? They said up to 34 500 MW of wind capacity offshore on the Ontario side of the Great Lakes, right? Yes they did. They even gave 65 locations they deemed viable. Viable meant they had strong enough consistent winds to pursue wind generation. The Scarborough Bluffs wasn’t one of them. Even if it was, the OPA would still think it was a bad idea.

Source: Analysis of Offshore Wind Farm Development in Ontario – Helimax

Moving to page nine: “Research Project Overview”

“Seeking approval for an anemometer to measure wind speeds and direction for at least two years”

Helimax says not enough wind is present for this site to be viable. The Canada Wind Atlas agrees. The Ontario Power Authority says offshore wind is just too expensive to be considered part of their 20 year generation plan. The Pickering Wind Turbine Generating Station reports ‘a lack of consistent strong winds’ as a major part of it’s failure. It’s five year average output is just 17%. The WindShare/Toronto Hydro turbine at the EX has a five year average output of just 12%. Apparently none of this matters. Just this one test they want to do, while disregarding these five undeniable facts.

Source: Summary of previously cited facts.

“Any potential offshore wind farm is subject to a separate environmental assessment with full agency and public participation”

Response: Wrong. This is simply untrue. There is no requirement for an environmental assessment for wind turbine projects in Ontario. This is insane but true. Toronto Hydro Energy Service would have to do a self assessment called an ‘environmental screening’. It is the equivalent of designing the test, and then going home and studying really hard for it. The craziest part, if you determine as the potential developer that all is well – and there are no concerns, you don’t even need to file your screening with the Ministry of Environment and as Sarah Palin’s supporters so proudly chanted you’re then free to ‘drill baby drill’ eroding the famous Scarborough Bluffs with every compaction.

Toronto Hydro Energy Services has demonstrated a complete inability to facilitate public participation. They can’t even hold a public meeting. Their slides are filled with lies, and misleading statements and signs of a lack of understanding of their own industry.

Source: Ontario’s Standard Offer Program – Wind, Ontario Power Authority

Some Final Thoughts:

The wind isn’t there. Helimax says so.

The Canada Wind Atlas agrees.

The costs of offshore projects are just too high. The OPA says so.

Capacity isn’t output. You build capacity and get paid back in output. (If you’re WindShare investors who bought 50% of Toronto Hydro’s EX turbine – you invest in capacity and lose money in output).

Germany isn’t Toronto Hydro Energy Services friend. They don’t plan on siting wind turbine generating stations any closer than 20 kilometres from shore. Their first project is 45 kilometres from shore. They also recognize how uncharted this territory is and have avoided these projects until recently.

98.8% of Wind Turbine Developers throughout the world, and in the history of wind turbine development, have opted for onshore projects. Even those aren’t financially viable in a lot of cases. (The Ex and Pickering are two local examples of non viable wind projects).

Parting Words:

Toronto Hydro Energy Services cannot even hold a simple community meeting.

They’ve demonstrated difficulty in sourcing a room.

They allow organizations they finance to shout down residents with bused in supporters and deny them an ability to speak.

They violate the legal principles of public meetings as defined by legislation they are compelled to follow.

They can’t even mail out notices.

And for everyone who braved that mess and ended up listening to what they had to say; they lie.

They mislead with invalid comparisons, factual errors and omissions.

They evade legitimate questions that demonstrate how bad of an idea this is.

The plan they’ve presented is built on an invalid scientific methodology that defies logic and avoids facts that work against their point.

What’s worse, it’s being managed by an individual whose last attempt at a wind project has failed beyond belief and is on track to cost hundreds of individuals thousands of dollars.

I welcome anyone at Toronto Hydro Energy Services to challenge any of the claims I’ve made here. I will publish any unedited response I receive from anyone at Toronto Hydro Energy Services so long as it addresses the points in here.

I also call on Toronto Hydro Energy Services to end this absolutely ridiculous project and withdraw their application.

Jack Simpson – Cover Your Eyes “commercially sensitive” information about the Exhibition Turbine is about to be disclosed…

John Laforet — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 23:30:32 +0000

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.

Reaction to Toronto Hydro Anemometer Meeting in Guildwood

John Laforet — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:54:12 +0000

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.