Those with “Nothing to hide, hide nothing….Climate alarmists hide it all!

Court Orders Release of White House Climate Documents

Holdren_polar_vortex

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The Competitive Enterprise Institute has won a case against the White House, forcing the release of documents pertaining a climate video created by White House Science AdvisorJohn Holdren. When the content of Holdren’s climate video challenged under the federal Information Quality Act, the White House claimed the video was the “personal opinion” of John Holdren, not an official communication, and therefore not subject to the Act. The newly released emails allegedly cast doubt on this assertion.

On January 8, 2014, the White House posted a controversial video claiming that global warming causes more severe winter cold. Called “The Polar Vortex Explained in 2 Minutes,” it featured the director of the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy (OSTP), John Holdren, claiming that a “growing body of evidence” showed that the “extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States” at the time was “a pattern that we can expect to see with increasing frequency as global warming continues.”

This claim was questioned by many scientists and commentators. (See, e.g., Jason Samenow, Scientists: Don’t make “extreme cold” centerpiece of global warming argument, Washington Post, Feb. 20, 2014 (linking to objection by five well-known climate scientists in the Feb. 14, 2014 issue of Science magazine); Patrick J. Michaels, Hot Air About Cold Air, Jan. 16, 2014 (former state climatologist of Virginia rejected Holdren’s claim.))

In April 2014, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) sent a request for correction of this statement under the federal Information Quality Act, citing peer-reviewed scientific articles debunking it. In June 2014, OSTP rejectedthis request, claiming that Holdren’s statement was his “personal opinion,” not the agency’s position, and that it thus did not constitute “information” subject to the Information Quality Act, which excludes “subjective opinions” from its reach.

When OSTP produced the records on March 4, 2016 (they are at this link), they showed inconsistency in OSTP’s position over time. Although OSTP told CEI in June 2014 that Holdren’s claim was just his personal “opinion,” not “information” that is subject to the Information Quality Act (IQA), this was not the position it originally took in its draft response to CEI’s request back in Spring 2014.

Instead, OSTP described Holdren’s claim in these drafts as “information provided by the government [that] meet[s] ‘basic standards of quality, including objectivity, utility, and integrity,” and constituted “communications from the White House about climate science.” (see pages 1 and 5 of each draft). Accordingly, OSTP argued it complied with the IQA’s standards for the quality of official information.

Read more: http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/hans-bader/court-orders-wh-ostp-release-records-related-claim-global-warming-causes

The following is the video at the centre of this controversy.

If President Obama and John Holdren genuinely think the evidence supports their position, that Climate Change is a serious threat, why don’t they simply stand by the evidence which they believe supports their case? Why did John Holdren, in my opinion, attempt to hide behind legal technicalities, and do everything in his power to obstruct transparency, when challenged about the defensibility of alarmist statements he made about climate change?

Windscam Fighters Achieve Success!

If You’re Going through Wind Farm Hell, Then Keep Going

west pinchbeck

****

What impresses STT most is the tenacity and perseverance of community defenders, all over the Globe.

Pro-farming (REAL farming, that is), pro-community and pro-real power groups are better informed and organised, and more vocal and hostile, than ever before.

Hard-working, decent, rural people throughout the world are fighting back – to obtain sensible energy policies that support growth, development and vibrant, prosperous rural communities – against an industry with all the natural respect for property rights of Genghis Khan; and the moral fibre of Judas Iscariot.

These are entirely reasonable people who have tumbled to the fact that they have been lined up as “road-kill” by their political betters to suffer the consequences of a policy built around an insanely expensive, utterly unreliable, intermittent power source – that can only survive on a raft of massive subsidies; kills millions of birds and bats; destroys communities;drives people from their homes; and otherwise makes life misery for thousands around the world.

These people are out to smash a “policy” that – in a few years time, when it all inevitably collapses – will be revealed for what it is: an enormous government-backed Ponzi scheme, the foundations for which are greed and stupidity; and the “justification” for which can only be described as a circus of the bizarre.

STT would like to think that we’ve helped these dedicated individuals and groups a little, by providing them with the kind of factual ammunition that cuts directly across the treachery, lies and deceit – which are the tools-in-trade for the wind industry, its goons and parasites.

But, whatever the source of information, pro-community groups are in earnest when it comes to protecting all that they’ve toiled for.

These days, whenever a wind farm is proposed; or the developer is out in the field – literally ‘thumping’ its message home (see our post here) – the term most employed to cover the community’s response is ‘OUTRAGE’.

However, occupying the opposite end of the emotional spectrum, is the infectious, fun-filled term: ‘REJOICE’ – which is the only word powerful enough to capture the sense of victory and relief, for those who have spent thousands of relentless, unpaid hours dedicated to the defence of their communities, their homes, their farms, their businesses and their families.

In Britain, dogged community defenders are winning the Battle for Britain; skirmish by skirmish; village by village; town by town.

The wind industry is being pummelled by an environment in which the massive and endless subsidies upon which the scam essentially depends have been slashed – never to return.

And in which community defenders have been finally (and quite rightly) given a say about the protection and preservation of their common law rights – little rights, like the right to own and enjoy property; free from the unlawful interference of sleep-killing, incessant turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound.

Here’s yet another example of how perseverance and tenacity trumps the subsidy-soaked malice exhibited by an industry peopled with career criminals, chancers and second-hand car salesman.

West Pinchbeck campaigners win four-year campaign to defeat wind farm
Spalding Guardian
17 March 2016

Campaigners have won their four-year battle to stop a wind farm being built at West Pinchbeck.

The words “We Have Won!” next to a picture of two filled champagne glasses appeared on the Stop West Pinchbeck Wind Farm website after South Holland District Council (SHDC) ruled the Wind Ventures Ltd application had run out of time for an appeal against non-determination.

“I think the fact that our overwhelming emotion is relief is probably an indication of how much we have been affected just by the threat of this terrible development, and over a prolonged period.”
Campaigner Sue Blake

This means the application is dead in the water.

Leading campaigner Tony Fear said: “We are of course delighted even though it does feel a little bit odd that it just fizzled out in this way.

“The real good news is that there can be no appeal so it is genuine closure.”

The wind farm, with its nine turbines measuring 126m to the tip, would have been sited on Fen Farm, South Fen – a site known as The Delph – and sandwiched between two nature reserves.

Sue Blake, from the campaign group, said: “I think the fact that our overwhelming emotion is relief is probably an indication of how much we have been affected just by the threat of this terrible development, and over a prolonged period.”

South Holland and The Deepings MP John Hayes joined the battle at West Pinchbeck and in April, 2014 he said the Conservatives were devising a policy to scrap subsidies for onshore wind farms.

The former energy minister said then that “the threat of onshore wind will be removed with the subsidies”.

Mr Hayes also said residents would get the final say on wind farm applications.

Wind farm victim Jane Davis, who was forced to quit her Deeping St Nicholas home through turbine noise, this week highlighted the timing of the news on The Delph application as the Bill honouring the pledges to end public subsidies and to give residents the final say had its third reading in the House of Commons.

Mrs Davis said: “The end of this application removes a severe threat to residential amenity, health and wildlife in the surrounding area.

“My husband (Julian) and I are very pleased with the decision by SHDC to ‘time out’ the application.

“This was a correct decision given the wishes of the local people in the area, and the emerging knowledge of the significant ways that noise pollution, particularly low frequency industrial noise pollution can impact on people’s health.

“From a personal perspective we ran a very high risk of having a relative’s home significantly impacted upon, something we were dreading, and it would also have impacted on many friends as well. There is perhaps an irony that this application has been terminated ten years exactly after Deeping St Nicholas Wind farm started construction.

“Given the proximity to Willow Tree Fen nature reserve this application would have caused immeasurable harm to birdlife in particular.

“Visually the development would have further impacted on the locality which already has windfarms visible at Bicker, Deeping St Nicholas, Thorney and other small projects, with the likelihood of ever larger turbines being placed at Heckington Fen in the foreseeable future. The area is known for its cloudscapes and wide skies and this would have been damaged irreparably.

“Finally the proposed project was insignificant in terms of national energy production and would not have helped keep the lights on.”

By 2014, Stop West Pinchbeck Wind Farm campaigners had already spent £5,000 fighting the proposal for The Delph.

One strand of the fight involved demanding Wind Ventures carry out a new birdsurvey after the campaigners’ expert found flaws in the way data was collected.

Sue Blake said this week it is more than four years since residents heard of the proposal.

She said: “Believe it or not the developer failed to identify that the proposed site was adjacent to two nature reserves and therefore wholly inappropriate for an industrial scale wind farm, which is why it received vehement objections from Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust.

“At a ‘standing room only’ community meeting in July 2012 the developer was faced with unanimous objections from the local community. They chose to ignore all of this opposition, refusing to see that the there was no way to satisfactorily address the negative impacts, not least the impact of things like noise on nearby residents.

“We are delighted that recent changes in Government policy means that it is now much more difficult for developers to get planning permission for onshore wind farms not least because the concerns of the local community must be taken seriously, something which Wind Ventures failed to do from the outset. If they had they could have saved everyone, including themselves, a huge amount of needless stress, time and money.”
Spalding Guardian

Julian and Jane Davis, referred to above, successfully obtained a £2million out of court settlement from a wind farm operator, for noise nuisance; and the resultant loss of property value (the home became uninhabitable due to low-frequency noise, infrasound and vibration).

The Particulars of Julian and Jane Davis’ Claim are available here: Davis Complaint Particulars of Claim

And Jane Davis’ Statement (detailing their unsettling experiences and entirely unnecessary suffering) is available here: davis-noise-statement

The Davis claim was made under the common law tort of nuisance: for more on the law of nuisance, and the ability to launch a pre-emptive strike to stop these things from being built: Injunction Sought to Protect Neighbours’ Health from Wind Farm Noise

Don’t let the task daunt; don’t give up; and never give in.

winston-churchill-quotes

Infrasound from Wind Turbines, Much Worse than Thought….

German Doctors Spell Out the Serious Harm Caused by Wind Turbine Infrasound

wind-turbine-and-house-in-Finland

****

The wind industry has know about, attempted to cover up and lied about the adverse health effects caused by incessant turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound for over 30 years; and knowing full-well that the dB(A) weighting is irrelevant to measuring the low-frequency noise spectrum, wrote their own ‘rules’ that even make the risible claim wind turbines don’t generate infrasound at all.

The noise emissions from these things are, for thousands of unfortunate neighbours, a constant form of sonic torture that, ofcourse, can’t be hidden.

Slowly, but surely, methodical Medicos are gathering the evidence that proves what victims have known all along: constant exposure to low-frequency noise infrasound is human health hazard.

And the efforts to protect people from further, and utterly unnecessary harm, include those from German Doctors, like Johannes Mayer.  Dr Mayer appears in the video below (which unfortunately hasn’t been subtitled in English); however, the thrust of his findings are laid out by NoTricksZone.

German Medical Doctors Warn Hazards Of Wind Turbine Infrasound Are Very Real, Worse Than First Thought!
NoTricksZone
Pierre Gosselin
4 March 2016

Dr. med Johannes Mayer made a presentation on the serious hazards of infrasound (1 – 20 Hz) from wind turbines saying: “It is unbelievable the flood of international scientific publications that has appeared over the last one and half years.”

****

****

In the presentation Mayer cites “120 scientific papers” confirming the hazardous impacts of infrasound on human health.

Bogus claims infrasound is safe

Mayer blasts the lobby-backed claims (based on measurements taken by unsuitable instruments) that infrasound generated by wind turbines is harmless to humans and wildlife and presents a number of studies showing how the very opposite is true.

At 7:35 Mayer tells the audience that 5 years ago he also used to believe that infrasound was not a real factor for anyone a kilometer or further away from the source. But after having researched the new literature on the topic he concluded that infrasound is a serious factor on the health of humans even at far greater distances.

At the 8:20 mark Mayer explains how infrasound acts on the human inner ear and interacts with the brain, and the serious effects it can have on the human organs, citing a study from medical journal Lancet. “It’s confirmed by numerous scientific papers,” Mayer tells the audience. At 9:15 Mayer presents:

The short term effects on infrasound

– pressure in the ears

– anxiety feelings

– dizziness

– exhaustion

– tiredness in the morning

– respiration disturbance

Also experiments have been done on animals, and results show profound impacts on their physiology and health, ranging from changes in hormone levels and immunological parameters to damage to lung tissue, Mayer shows. At 10:08 he presents:

The long term impacts of infrasound:

– chronic respiratory disorders

– chronic stress and sleep disorders from higher stress hormone levels

– emotional disorder, depression, burnout

– high blood pressure, heart disease

And the symptoms of infrasound illness:

– depression

– irritability

– tension

– headache

– mental and physical exhaustion

– concentration and sleep disorders

– noise sensitization

All of this is caused the constant low pressure waves acting on the inner ear and fooling the body into thinking it is in motion when in fact it is not. Infrasound interferes with the body’s natural biorhythms. Mayer concludes this results in infrasound from wind turbines being “a problem to be taken very seriously”.

Especially dangerous for pregnant women

At the 15:50 mark Mayer reminds the audience that even European officials issued directives regulating infrasound and pregnant women, writing that “they should not perform activities that could generate strong low frequency vibrations because they could increase the risk of a miscarriage or premature birth.”

Mayer emphasizes that the effects of infrasound are not something imagined in people’s heads, but are in fact very real. It is even diagnosed as an illness by doctors.

“Turbines should not even be in sight”

Mayer blasts wind-turbine German government agencies for their refusal to acknowledge the very real health facts and for blindly following everything the wind lobby tells them. He cites medical expert Dr. Reinhard Bartsch of the Friedrich Schiller University in Jena (20:35):

“From today’s level of knowledge wind turbines should be placed only far away from residential areas, and better: they should not even be in sight.”

At the 21-minute mark Mayer presents major publications on infrasound. Studies by Thorne and Salt show that up to 40% of people are sensitive to infrasound and that the health of these people who live near wind parks is “considerably and seriously affected (injured) by this noise”.

Finally, a Canadian review of 62 scientific publications appearing in the Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine concluded that industrial wind turbines have “negative health impacts” on people who live in their vicinity.

Mayer praises regulations on distances from homes in Canada and New Zealand, which restrict the construction of wind turbines to 4 and 3 km away respectively.
NoTricksZone

Wind Turbine Infrasound… The Silent Offender!

Analysis of Low Frequency and Infrasound at the Shirley Wind Farm

A Cooperative Measurement Survey and Analysis of Low Frequency and Infrasound at the Shirley Wind Farm in Brown County, Wisconsin

Picture

“What you can’t hear, can hurt you”

The purpose was to determine whether infrasound was present in the homes of three families in the footprint of the Shirley Wind project (owned by Duke Energy).  These families have reported adverse health effects since the wind turbine utility commenced operation. Two have been forced out of their homes. They report experiencing symptoms of the type associated with wind turbine syndrome.  These families are my clients and they offered to act as intervener’s in another Wisconsin case, Highland Wind which is in the application hearing phase.  50 affidavits were filed by them and other residents near the utility describing adverse health effects and home abandonment for the eight turbine Shirley Wind project (click here for video) using Nordex N100 2.5 MW wind turbines.

The above graph shows that wind turbine noise is present outside and inside the residence. The SPL – dB (Sound Pressure Level – decibel) scale on the left hand side of the graph shows low frequency noise levels approaching 80. This is considered a noise level similar to an alarm clock or hair dryer.

Initially the PSC was going to have the study conducted by George and Dave Hessler.  This posed a major problem for credibility with the interveners and others who know their position from other projects.  The Wis. PSC staffers have a long relationship with them because they have done numerous studies for wind utilities in the state and have always given the utilities’ a clean bill of health claiming that sound levels at complainant’s homes met the state limits and that infrasound and low frequency sound was not a problem.  The attorneys for the citizen’s group, Anne Bensky and Peter McKeever for Forest Voice, and Glenn Reynolds, the attorney for the Town of Forest which also opposes the project, wanted the tests to be conducted but were concerned that the Hessler’s would produce a biased study.  It was decided that they would push for a study that included four acoustics experts, some on the wind industry side (Hesslers), independents (Schomer and Walker) and one who has demonstrated the ability to find infrasound inside homes (Rob Rand).  I was not available on the proposed test dates so I could not participate but Rob Rand was a very good alternative.  This also leaves me free to do my own evaluation of the study and collected data and audio files.  The participation of the Hesslers and Clean Wisconsin make it much harder for the wind industry trade associations to claim that this work is biased.

The four investigating firms are of the opinion that enough evidence and hypotheses have been given herein to classify LFN and infrasound as a serious issue, possibly affecting the future of the industry. It should be addressed beyond the present practice of showing that wind turbine levels are magnitudes below the threshold of hearing at low frequencies.

That infra and low frequency sound is a primary characteristic of wind turbine acoustic emissions was established by the team.  The argument that infrasound produced by modern upwind wind turbines does not have sufficient amplitude to reach the threshold of hearing (set for steady pure tones, not the complex mix of tones emitted by wind turbines) raised by the wind industry through its experts like Dr. Leventhall and the many acousticians and others who parrot his opinion is now discredited.  View full report here, pdf file


Paul Schomer, PHD, P.E. letter to Public Service Commission of Wisconsin

Picture

        First, the Wind Industry has continually denied that wind turbines produce any LFN. This study showed that it does. At R-2 it was measured as clearly as if the turbine had left a fingerprint on the inside of the house.

        Second, the Shirley study fully and completely corroborates Falmouth and fills the knowledge gap suggested by the MA study which was a literature review, not a hands-on field study. There is no reason to corroborate it again.

        Third, the measurement of ultra low frequencies produced by mega turbines such as those at Shirley and proposed for Highland are the key to avoiding significant impacts to human health from wind turbines. As the Minnesota study concludes, the low frequencies must be studied further as part of the project planning. In the case of Forest, this study of the low frequency isopleths must be a part of an in-depth EIS, or the project must be redesigned with smaller turbines that are not likely to precipitate such severe health problems that people have no choice but to abandon their homes. These are precisely the studies that we recommended in our Shirley report and the EIS is a perfect way to obtain the information before the project is built; and

        Fourth, the record as a whole in this case as well as the literature and case studies all over the world have suggested that people are leaving their homes because they are being exposed to significant levels of pulsating ultra low frequency sound produced by wind turbines.

        Sincerely, Paul Schomer, PHD, P.E. Member; Board Certified, Institute of
        Noise Control
                                                  download full document

Windpushers Destroying Economies World-Wide…Energy Poverty!

How Massively Subsidised Wind Power Destroys Power Markets & Economies

economics101

Wind and solar have destroyed the ability of the market to signal price
The Telegraph
Rupert Darwall
7 March 2016

Before the election, high electricity prices made the Big Six energy companies everyone’s favourite whipping boys. A report by the competition watchdog exonerated them. Government-driven social, environmental and network costs were the main drivers of rising electricity bills, the Competition and Markets Authority found. Now the Big Six have put themselves squarely back in the frame.

A 125-page report by the electricity industry lobby group, Energy UK, supports phasing out cheap coal power and demands more subsidies for wind and solar.

It is a high-risk strategy. In capitulating to “Big wind” and solar, the Big Six energy companies have no one to blame but themselves for the heightened political risk caused by rising electricity prices and theinevitable consumer backlash.

Weather-dependent wind and solar power is inherently unreliable and high cost. In addition to subsidies, wind and solar need more grid infrastructure. When the wind blows and the sun shines, they swamp the grid with zero marginal cost electricity, forcing gas, coal and nuclear to reduce their output.

Lower prices and lower output demolish the investment case for building the gas-fired power stations the Government says are vital. These hidden costs are the real killer.

As Amber Rudd, the energy and climate secretary, observed in her “smell the coffee speech” last November, “we now have an electricity system where no form of power generation, not even gas-fired power stations, can be built without government intervention”.

Advocates of wind and solar claim falling costs mean renewables will soon reach “grid parity”. Anyone who knows anything about electricity understands this is highly misleading.

To its great discredit, the Big Six report peddles the grid-parity fib, which ignores the hidden costs imposed on the rest of the system. Rather lamely, the report calls for government and industry to conduct further analysis on the whole-system costs of weather-dependent renewables, something it very well could have done itself.

While the Government insulates wind and solar investors from the damaging effect their output has on the market, the report admits that wind and solar have destroyed the ability of the wholesale market to provide price signals to guide investment decisions.

It envisages more wind and solar on the grid, leading to more electricity priced as garbage that consumers are forced to pay someone else to take away during periods of negative prices.

Since last summer, almost 8.5 gigawatts of conventional capacity has closed or faces closure. In 2014, the Big Six made £556m from renewables and lost £1,615m on their gas and coal-fired power stations.

Without cheap electrical storage, wind and solar can’t keep the lights on. The report foresees storage as the “single most important technological breakthrough” likely in the next 15 years. One thing’s for sure. It hasn’t happened yet.

Thanks to government policies deliberately distorting the market, wehave over-invested in wind and solar. It has blighted investment in reliable capacity that can keep the lights on.

This is the crux of Britain’s energy crunch. Clearly it was a colossal mistake to have embarked on renewables with storage unsolved.

The Big Six could have drawn attention to a situation where, in a world awash with hydrocarbons, Britain has an increasing shortage of generating capacity. There is no shortage of energy in the world. Oil prices have been falling. Last month, the US started exporting natural gas for the first time. In the first decade of electricity privatisation, around half Britain’s generating capacity was renewed. The market worked.

Now that the market has been destroyed, the real choice is between finding a path back to the market or accepting the Government is running the show. Private ownership and state control is the worst of all worlds.

Political risk is borne by the private sector, which in turn means higher electricity bills. Financial efficiency would see new investment being funded off the Government’s balance sheet and reinstating the Central Electricity Generating Board. Instead, the Big Six report calls for more honesty about the impact of more renewables on electricity bills without providing any itself. For the industry, higher bills are primarily a PR problem to be solved by better communication.

Energy UK’s chief, Lawrence Slade, goes out on a limb in advocating a British equivalent of Germany’s disastrous Energiewende (Energy Transition). In 2004, the Green energy minister, Jürgen Trittin, claimed that the extra cost of renewable energy on monthly bills was equivalent to the cost of a scoop of ice cream.

Nine years later, CDU minister Peter Altmaier said Energiewende could cost around €1 trillion by the end of the 2030s. The cost of feed-in tariffs and other subsidies is currently €21.8bn a year; €20bn is being spent on a new north-south high voltage line and investment in other grid infrastructure is likely to double that number.

Thanks to the high volatility of wind and solar output, 25pc of Germany’s green energy is dumped on other countries at low or negative prices, destabilising the grid of Germany’s neighbours. At home, the situation is just as serious.

In 2013, 345,000 households could not pay their electricity bills. In January 2014, Deutsche Bank warned that Germany’s energy cost penalty was already eroding its industrial base.

In a 2013 survey by the German Chambers of Commerce, over half of industrial companies reported that Energiewende was having a negative or very negative impact on their competitiveness.

To see a successful energy transformation, you have to look across the Atlantic. In the most telling indication of the Big Six surrender to the green lobby, there is not a single mention of fracking and the US shale revolution. But, as the report states, it is assumed that the UK remains part of the European Union and continues to try to meet its legally binding renewable energy targets for 2020 under the 2009 renewable energy directive. The underlying message from the Big Six is clear: if you want lower electricity bills, vote leave.

Rupert Darwall is the author of The Age of Global Warming: A History (Quartet, 2013)
The Telegraph

Rupert Darwall

Press Release, from Denmark, WI – Brown County Residents for Responsible Wind Energy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE*** March 20, 2016

County Health Officer Admits Feeling Ill When Near Duke’s Shirley Wind Turbines DENMARK, WI – Brown County appears to be digging a deeper and deeper hole for itself as more facts come to light surrounding Duke Energy’s Shirley Windpower. After an unusually long almost 3 month delay in satisfying a resident’s open records request, the records ultimately provided expose that former Brown County Health Officer Chua Xiong feels ill when visiting the Shirley Wind facility. In an email to her intern Carolyn Harvey she states: “Carolyn the times I have been out there by the Wind Turbines, l get such migraine headaches. I think I should take some preventative Tylenol before I head out there.” Despite this admission, approximately one month later Ms. Xiong went on to make her declaration that “Currently there is insufficient scientific evidence-based research to support the relationship between wind turbines and health concerns.” She then went further in saying that this was her “final decision” and that she would only monitor the situation “on an annual basis”. In this decision she completely ignored the real world health impact of Duke Energy’s wind turbines on Brown County families as evidenced through their sworn affidavits and their documentation of past and continued suffering, not to mention her own repeated migraines when in proximity to Duke’s turbines. So what has happened between Ms. Xiong’s declaration and the March 18th release of the open records showing that Brown County’s Health Officer Chua Xiong suffers migraines when she is by the Shirley Wind turbines? On March 4th, Ms. Xiong submitted her resignation to County Executive Troy Streckenbach. He did not share this with County department heads until just two days prior to March 18th, Ms. Xiong’s last day. This date also coincides with Executive Streckenbach’s announcement of Brown County Corporation Counsel Juliana Ruenzel’s resignation. It is high time that Brown County and its Health Director follow the lead of its own Board of Health who unanimously declared Duke’s wind turbines in Glenmore a “Human Health Hazard”. They need to recognize that residents are sick, homes have been abandoned, that outsiders (even the County’s own Health Director) feel ill while in the project area, and FINALLY do whatever is necessary to protect the health and safety of southern Brown County residents. Brown County does not need Shirley Wind to become its Flint, Michigan. Until the County does the right thing and takes action, families will continue to suffer, the County’s inaction will escalate their legal liability, and this issue will not go away.

Denmark, WI   54208                                                                                                        www.BCCRWE.com

Faux-green crowd making a Killing from Carbon/Climate Scams!

Canada may already be carbon neutral, so why are we keeping it a secret?

Not all CO2 emitted by people stays in the atmosphere. Much of it returns to the earth, mainly through the carbon absorption and sequestration power of plants, soil, and trees.

Clement Sabourin/AFP/Getty Images
Not all CO2 emitted by people stays in the atmosphere. Much of it returns to the earth, mainly through the carbon absorption and sequestration power of plants, soil, and trees.

Here’s a seemingly simple question: Is Canada a net carbon dioxide emitter? You would think so from reading news headlines. We’ve earned the scorn of environmentalists, NGOs, and media outlets galore, labelled with such juvenile epithets as “fossil of the year” or “corrupt petro-state.”

Sadly, lost in all the hyperbole is the actual science. There is nothing quantitative about the vague idea that, as a “progressive nation,” Canada should be expected to “do more” to fight climate change.

But therein lies the rub; Canada is poised to immediately do more to combat climate change than almost every other country in the world. How, you ask? Well, by doing more of the same. If that sounds ludicrous, let me explain.

Most Canadians would agree that our response to climate change needs to be scientifically sound, environmentally sustainable and financially realistic, as well as global, comprehensive, and holistic. Right now, our approach is none of those things; the public discourse is driven by a myopic, ideological obsession with carbon emissions alone. What else is there, you ask?

The answer comes from the most recent report (2014) of the Global Carbon Project, which states that global human-induced CO2 emissions were 36 billion tonnes. Of that, 36 per cent stayed in the atmosphere, 27 per cent was absorbed by water, and 37 per cent was absorbed by land.

That’s right — absorbed by land! Not all CO2 emitted by people stays in the atmosphere. Much of it returns to the earth, mainly through the carbon absorption and sequestration power of plants, soil, and trees.

Enough Trees Cut Down in Niagara Region , to Do Damage, Irreparable for Decades…

Niagara Region Wind won’t say how many trees they are cutting down

Niagara Region Wind Farm project co-ordinator Shiloh Berriman wouldn’t say how many trees would be cut on along the 45 km route laid out for the transmission lines.

 

“That’s not public information that we’re willing to give out. We haven’t finished out tree clearing yet, so I don’t actually have a number. And it’s not something public that we would like to give out,” she said.

1297813168809_ORIGINALBy Allan Benner, The Tribune
Andy Koopal frowned as he looked down at the freshly cut metre-wide tree trunk, recalling the majestic oak that it once supported. “That tree was over 150 years old,” he said. “It was a perfect healthy tree. There was no need for it.”

He said the tree – likely a sapling when Canada became a country – was one of eight old growth oaks that border his 10 hectares of farmland on Concession 6 in Wellandport, near Side Road 42. When the Fort Erie resident drove into Wainfleet recently, he said he was shocked to see that all of the trees were cut down and removed. “I came by here Saturday. Then I saw the damage they did,” he said.

Along with Koopal’s trees, likely hundreds more were cut throughout rural west Niagara to make room for transmission lines feeding into new industrial wind turbines being built near by Niagara Region Wind Farm, said Wainfleet’s engineering manager Richard Nan. The company is building a 230 Megawatt industrial wind farm, with wind turbines located in Wainfleet, West Lincoln and Lincoln. Read article

British TV Has an Expose on the Wind Industry, and the Corruption within it!

TELEVISION

How does anyone keep up with all the good stuff out there on TV?

James Delingpole

 March 2016

‘We have a problem. Yes. At the wind farm.’ Any conspiracy thriller with lines like that has definitely got my vote. Possibly most of you are unaware of this, because it’s not something I talk about often, but I happen to be not too fond of the things I call bat-chomping, bird-slicing eco-crucifixes — nor of the charlatans, crooks, liars and parasites who make their living out of them.

Indeed, whenever I try to think of an industry that’s worse than wind farms I keep coming unstuck. At least landmines serve a useful purpose for force protection; at least Albanian prostitutes make a few men very happy. Wind, on the other hand, is a business entirely dependent on junk science, compulsory government levies and crony capitalist favouritism which produces nothing of real value. It is intrinsically corrupt and therefore prone to exactly the kind of greed and skulduggery we see in the latest Scandi crime series, Follow the Money (BBC4, Saturday).

One of the vows I made after my recent brush with death was to spend more time playing video games and watching TV. But what I’m finding is that even when you treble your screen time, it’s still not enough to keep pace with all the good stuff that’s out there. I haven’t seen Happy Valley yet, which I know I must. Nor, despite a heroic effort, have I got further than the middle of season four of The Walking Dead. And of course as soon as the new season of Thronesstarts we’re going to be really stuffed. It is quite clear what is to blame for all this: globalisation.

When all the foreign TV you had to catch up with was American, it was just about manageable. But now that the French have started making good stuff (Spiral; Les Revenants — the first series, anyway) — and the Germans (Deutschland 83); and the Swedes and the Danes (Borgen; The Killing; The Bridge; Wallander); and even the Icelanders (Trapped) — there just aren’t enough hours in the evening to keep abreast of everything.

 

This means you have to be quite ruthless. For example, after two episodes, I am thinking of ditching Occupied, the Norwegian series with which I’ve been catching up on Sky Arts. It has an interesting premise: Norway has a keen green prime minister who — to combat climate change — decides to go all out for thorium and close down his country’s oil fields. Unfortunately, this doesn’t go down well with the Russkies who, in alliance with the European Union, occupy Norway and force it to bring its oil production back on stream. Cue much nationalistic resentment, tension and brinkmanship.

What I’m finding, though, so far, is the implausible but potentially thrilling geopolitical backdrop is being somewhat wasted on what’s too often a cosy domestic drama (Will she/won’t she keep her restaurant open? How often will he volunteer to do the dishes?) combined with the sort of anally retentive political intrigue that explains why I never watched Borgen or the West Wing. Tell me if I’m wrong, though: if there’s some heavy Spetsnaz action to come and if all kicks off militarily in future episodes, then I’m in.

Windweasels in Ireland, Slammed for Not Obeying the Rules!

Irish High Court Slams Cork Wind Farm

irish flag15n-1-web

High Court overturns permission for Cork wind farm
The Irish Times
Mary Carolan
25 February 2016

Judge says process used by An Bord Pleanála did not comply with Irish law

The High Court has overturned a grant of planning permission for a wind farm near Inchigeelagh, Co Cork.

Mr Justice Bernard Barton ruled the permission must be quashed after finding that the process under which An Bord Pleanála had decided relevant issues concerning compliance with two European Directives – the Habitats Directive and the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive – did not comply with Irish law.

The judge, whose written judgment will be formally published later, adjourned making formal orders in the case to March 10th.

The legal challenge was brought by Klaus Balz and Hanna Heubach, Bearr na Gaoithe, Inchigeelagh, over An Bord Pleanála’s grant of permission toCleanrath Windfarm Ltd to construct 11 turbines up to a height of 126m, and other structures including a 85m meteorological mast, at Cleanrath, Co Cork.

The couple operate a shrubbery business located some 650m from the nearest turbine on the proposed development.

Cork County Council had refused permission for the project in June 2011 because it considered that would result in destruction of a a habitat of high ecological value and have a major impact on an area of high local biodiversity value, the court heard.

Because of this, the council held the proposed development would materially contravene the stated objectives of its current development plan.

The council’s refusal was successfully appealed to An Bord Pleanála which in April 2013 granted permission.

The couple, represented by Eamon Galligan SC, instructed by solicitor Joe Noonan,  then initiated their judicial review proceedings against the Board with the council and Cleanrath Windfarm Ltd as notice parties.

The couple argued the board’s decision was flawed on grounds including failure to carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) concerning the project.

The board, it was claimed, failed to carry out an appropriate assessment, as required under the Habitats Directive,  on nearby sites such as the Gearagh Special Area of Conservation and the Mullaghanish to Musheramore Special Protection Areas.
The Irish Times

1397574371-dublin-thousands-gather-to-protest-against-pylons-and-wind-turbines_4479876

Frauds, Crooks and Criminals

Demonstrating daily that diversity is not strength!

Family Hype

All Things Related To The Family

DeFrock

defrock.org's principal concern is the environmental and human damage of industrial wind turbines on rural communities

Gerold's Blog

The truth shall set you free but first it will make you miserable

Politisite

Breaking Political News, Election Results, Commentary and Analysis

Canadian Common Sense

Canadian Common Sense - A Unique Perspective from Grassroots Canadians

Falmouth's Firetower Wind

a wind energy debacle

The Law is my Oyster

The Law and its Place in Society

Illinois Leaks

Edgar County Watchdogs

stubbornlyme.

My thoughts...my life...my own way.

Oppose! Swanton Wind

Proposed Wind Project on Rocky Ridge

Climate Audit

by Steve McIntyre

4TimesAYear's Blog

Trying to stop climate change is like trying to stop the seasons from changing. We don't control the climate; IT controls US.

Wolsten

Wandering Words

Patti Kellar

WIND WARRIOR

John Coleman's Blog

Global Warming/Climate Change is not a problem