|
||||||
Health
Destroying the Social Fabric of Rural Ontario!
Social unrest due to industrial wind turbines: “A shocking snapshot of how serious it is”
We have a crisis folks, all around London, and it’s getting almost no attention by the politicians, and, quite frankly, by the media. (Andy Oudman, CJBK London)
As the skeptics all too painfully know, most of the mainstream media, including public broadcasters like the CBC and TVO, seem to be acting as enthusiastic trumpet blowers for every dire prognostication of doom and gloom made by the UN’s dishonest, disgraceful IPCC on the subject of man-made global warming/climate change.
Climate change as a planetary emergency has been the rationale for the deployment of useless and highly destructive “green” energy alternatives, such as industrial wind turbines. The media have been playing a crucial role in maintaining the fiction, spreading misinformation, giving only one side of the story, essentially propagandizing, and failing to dig deep with journalistic integrity to uncover the big picture.
Rarely will you see or hear learned, educated skeptics, of which there are plenty, invited as guests on any radio or television programs to present their views on the subject of man-made global warming, climate change, industrial wind turbines, or Ontario’s green energy fiasco. A few of the media are the exception proving the rule: the National Post, Financial Post, and Goldhawk Fights Back come to mind as having addressed some of these topics in a non-biased manner.
Today was a great day. A London, Ontario radio station, CJBK, on its program London Today With Any Oudman, spent most of the morning interviewing people about the ominous social unrest in Southern Ontario caused by the massive proliferation of industrial wind turbine projects. These factories cover huge swaths of prime farmland. The invasion of the towering machines has been aided and abetted by the democracy-robbingGreen Energy Act and the heartless see-hear-speak-no-evil attitude of the Ontario Liberal government. The people who live there and who have had to suffer the devastating social and personal consequences, with more to come, have struggled to make their voices heard.
It’s compelling listening:
The Hypocrisy of the Faux-green wind promoters!
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE’S HYPOCRISY ON FULL DISPLAY AGAIN. THIS TIME WITH BISPHENOL A.
We all know that one of the components of wind turbine blades is Bisphenol A, which breaks down over time and exposure to the weather, feeding into the air. The internal Vestas report which states that over 1 ton of hazardous waste is created with the production of every single turbine blade is well documented and has been discussed many times on this site. Bisphenol A is one of those wastes that Vesta was referring to.
“In a report released by the company, it was revealed that over the last four quarters waste from the Windsor facility increased by 44.7 percent and produced 36 percent more toxic waste than in the previous quarter.
Of that waste, almost ¾ of it was sent to landfills in the state. The waste consists of fiberglass epoxy resin, plastic, fiberglass dust and other items.
A Vestas employee, who wishes to remain anonymous, told the Gazette that he needs to shower every day prior to coming home to avoid harm to his children from the resins that get on his skin. The company has been cited by OSHA for violations related to chemicals used at the facility that have caused injury to employees.
The Greeley Report said an inside report indicates the plant produces approximately 40 blades per week with each blade generating 1 ton of waste.
Andrew Longeteig, A spokesman for Vestas, explained the reason for the increase in the amount of hazardous waste produced in 2011 was because of increases in production related to a record-breaking year for Vestas wind turbine sales in the United States and Canada in 2010.He went on to say that none of the hazardous waste was considered toxic.”
Well, if hazardous waste isn’t toxic, exactly what is it?
Click here to see the Vestas report which states that they’re trying to reduce waste from the production of each blade to 2716 kg.
Anyway, back to Environmental Defence….They’ve published an article on their site stating that human exposure levels to Bisphenol A deemed ‘safe’ may be over-estimated.
“Their research found that human testes were more than 100 times more susceptible to some compounds, including BPA, compared to those in rodents. BPA is linked to prostate cancer, obesity, heart disease and possibly breast cancer. This means that current standards may be based on an underestimate of the risk posed to humans by BPA exposure.
Considering that according to the Canadian Health Measures survey 95 per cent of Canadians aged 3-79 have BPA in their bodies, this is a huge cause for concern. BPA was banned from baby bottles because it was declared toxic by Health Canada. However, it is still far too widespread in other consumer products like receipts, cans, and plastic food containers, and it may be worse for our health than previously thought.
More needs to be done to protect Canadians from toxic chemicals like BPA.”
Yet, when I contacted Environmental Defence a couple of years ago to try to get them to take action against the negative environmental effects of wind turbines on Ontario residents, they advised me that they don’t get involved in such matters. Really? So whose environment are they defending? And what’s their criteria? It seems they’re up in arms about Bisphenol A polluting the air, but if that material comes from wind turbines, then it’s okay?
At the same time, I tried to see if Environmental Defence would support an initiative to get industrial wind turbines built in and around the GTA, including along the shoreline. Since they’re avid supporters of wind energy, I thought I could get them on board with getting them built near where they live. Again, I was advised that that’s not an area that they get involved with.
Ahhh….green hypocrisy. Always so easy to expose. — DQ
Wind Company buys home of people suffering from wind turbines!
| Steven N Luann Therrien | 7:11am Apr 17 |
4/15/2014 Wind Opponents Call The Nelsons Heroes, Predict More Buyouts Robin Smith Staff Writer
Wind opponents from across Vermont reacted to the settlement between Green Mountain Power and Don and Shirley Nelson of Lowell on Monday, calling them heroes.
They said they hope the buyout could spur more as the state begins to realize that industrial wind projects have an impact on human neighbors and they vowed to continue fighting them.
Luann Therrien of Sheffield, who also lives near industrial wind turbines, said she cried for joy when she heard the news that the Nelsons had struck a deal and would be paid for their property.
“We are so thrilled for them. We are so excited that they can get out and get healthy,” she said.
Her husband Steve said he had been to the Nelsons’ farm and understood their experience. “I wouldn’t have wanted to be there another day,” he said.
Therrien said he hoped that this settlement creates a pathway for others who are experiencing health impacts.
They have tried for years to get First Wind to purchase their property.
Steve Wright of Craftsbury, president of Ridge Protectors, said the Nelsons had the Vermont dream, until they were forced from their land by a foreign-owned corporation.
“Yes, they were paid for that property, but money runs a poor second to beauty, peace, quiet and a love for your land.
“Don and Shirley are heroes. They represent the long-held Vermont values that live on in the struggle for an energy policy we know is possible, one that doesn’t drive people from their homes, damage their health, and wither hope.
“The Nelsons are not the only ones forced off their land; already, at least three other families near the Lowell project have experienced a similar fate. More are expected,” Wright said.
Annette Smith of Vermonters for a Clean Environment said her group supports the Nelsons’ decision to agree to a settlement.
“At the same time, we and many others in the community know that they have been damaged by Green Mountain Power far beyond what any monetary settlement could provide,” Smith stated.
“Any time a utility has to buy out a neighbor, it is not a ‘win’ for the corporation.”
“We expect this is just the beginning of litigation and settlements … ,” Smith stated.
“We at Energize Vermont are saddened that the Kingdom Community Wind tragedy has driven Don and Shirley Nelson from their home,” executive director Mark Whitworth of Newark said.
GMP’s settlement “represents just the latest in the series of unanticipated costs” from the wind project that will be passed on to consumers “who are weary of hearing about the cost-effectiveness of wind-generated electricity,” Whitworth stated.
Neighbors are being hurt, Wright said, even though industrial wind projects have “no effective climate change benefit.”
“Industrial wind technology does not work on the New England landscape and the Lowell Project, in spite of GMP’s claims, is clear proof,” he said.
“Complicit in this sad tale is the Shumlin administration, aided and abetted by the so-called ‘environmental’ community. Together, they continue to advance statewide energy policy that even the Public Service Board acknowledges worsens Vermont’s carbon footprint,” Wright stated.
“The negative impacts of the Lowell turbines are far greater than Green Mountain Power has disclosed and the benefits to society that they promised will never be realized,” Whitworth stated.
“The turbines will have no impact on global climate change. Their damage to the land is permanent,” Whitworth stated.
“Wind energy generation is simply inappropriate for Vermont,” Smith stated.
“It does not live up to the promises of ‘free fuel,’ but instead comes at tremendous and unaccounted-for costs. The harm done to the Nelson’s property which now has no value in the real estate market, to Don and Shirley’s health and quality of life which is degraded on a daily basis, and to the wildlife, water resources and landscape are evidence that big wind turbines have no place in Vermont,” Smith stated.
The Nelsons will remain “a symbol to the rest of Vermont” of the sacrifices demanded of those who are forced to live near wind turbines. “In the end, we believe the Lowell wind turbines must come down,” Smith said.
“The Nelsons are not the only Vermonters who have suffered ill health and financial damage because of industrial wind turbines,” Whitworth stated.
“We call upon Green Mountain Power, First Wind, and Georgia Mountain Community Wind to make reparations to the other Vermont victims of their industrial wind projects.
Steve Therrien said he has asked First Wind three times to buy them out.
They have tried to find an attorney who would work for free to help them sue the developer but have not been successful.
Why I’m cheering for fossil fuels this Earth Day
By John Stossel
“The heavens reek, the waters below are foul … we are in a crisis of survival.” That’s how Walter Cronkite and CBS hyped the first Earth Day, back in 1970. Somehow we’ve survived since then, and most of life got better, although I never hear that from the worrywarts. Of course, some things got better because of government: We passed environmental rules that got most of the filth out of the air and sewage out of lakes and rivers. Great — but now we’re told that we’re in big trouble because greenhouse gases cause global warming. I mean, climate change.
Time and again, environmentalists oppose the energy production most likely to make the world cleaner and safer. Instead, they persuade politicians to spend billions of your dollars on symbolism like “renewable” energy.
“Crop yields are down, deaths from heat are up,” says the Los Angeles Times. The “Worst Is Yet to Come,” warns The New York Times. This hype is not new. Alarmists always fool the gullible media. They once fooled me. A few years back, we were going to be killed by global cooling, overpopulation, pesticide residues, West Nile virus, bird flu, Y2K, cellphone radiation, mad cow disease, etc. Now it’s global warming. Reporters don’t make these scares up. The recent hype about global warming comes from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Most of its members are serious scientists. But reporters don’t realize that those scientists, like bird flu specialists, have every incentive to hype the risk. If their computer models (which so far have been wrong) predict disaster, they get attention and money. If they say, “I’m not sure,” they get nothing. Also, the IPCC is not just a panel of scientists. It’s an intergovernmental panel. It’s a bureaucracy controlled by the sort of people who once ran for student council and are “exhilarated by the prospect of putting the thumb of the federal government on the scale.” Actually, that wasn’t a quote from a global warming alarmist. It’s from anti-marijuana alarmist and former Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare Joe Califano. But it’s the same crisis mindset. Scientists who disagree, who are reluctant to put their thumbs on the government scale, don’t feel welcome in the IPCC. It’s possible climate change may become a problem. But even if industrialization brings warming, we’ve got more important problems. On my TV show this week, statistician Bjorn Lomborg points out that “air pollution kills 4.3 million people each year … We need to get a sense of priority.” That deadly air pollution happens because, to keep warm, poor people burn dung in their huts. Yet, time and again, environmentalists oppose the energy production most likely to make the world cleaner and safer. Instead, they persuade politicians to spend billions of your dollars on symbolism like “renewable” energy. “The amazing number that most people haven’t heard is, if you take all the solar panels and all the wind turbines in the world,” says Lomborg, “they have (eliminated) less CO2 than what U.S. fracking (cracking rocks below ground to extract oil and natural gas) managed to do.” That progress occurred despite opposition from environmentalists — and even bans in places like my stupid state, New York, where activists worry fracking will cause earthquakes or poison the water. Do environmentalists even care about measuring costs instead of just assuming benefits? We spend $7 billion to subsidize electric cars. Even if America reached the president’s absurd 2015 goal of “a million electric cars on the road” (we won’t get close), how much would it delay warming of the Earth? “One hour,” says Lomborg. “This is a symbolic act.” Symbolic. Environmentalism is now more religion than science. It even comes with built-in doomsday stories to warn people about what will happen if they disobey — a bit like the movie “Noah” that’s in theaters now. While environmentalists lament that our time is running out, environmental indicators get better, technological improvements reduce carbon dioxide, water gets cleaner for millions, and human life expectancy goes up. This Earth Day, instead of attacking those who sell fossil fuels, I will applaud them for overcoming constant environmental hysteria — while providing affordable energy that will allow us to fight poverty, which is the real threat to the people of the world. John Stossel joined Fox Business Network (FBN) in 2009. He is the host of “Stossel” (Thursdays at 9 PM/ET), a weekly program highlighting current consumer issues with a libertarian viewpoint. Stossel also appears regularly on Fox News Channel (FNC) providing signature analysis.
Ireland’s Wind Energy Policy brings out 2000 protesters!
Thousands protest over wind and energy policy
Tuesday 15 April 2014 23.03
1 of 4
Thousands have protested in Dublin city centre against the Government’s wind energy and pylons policy.
Organisers claim up to 4,000 people attended the march, which began at the Garden of Remembrance and ended outside Leinster House.
The protest was organised by Wind Aware Ireland, a new group combined of organisations against pylons and overhead power cables and those opposed to wind farms.
With increasing alarm over climate change in recent weeks, Ireland’s energy policy is under scrutiny like never before.
The matter is of acute political significance in many parts of the country as the Local Elections approach.
News that a wind energy export deal with Britain was off the table has done little to reduce concerns.
Environmental campaigners are calling for the Government to encourage communities to take ownership of future wind energy plans.
Meanwhile, the Government has set a tentative date of later this year for publishing its Climate Bill.
Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform Brendan Howlin earlier said that Ireland faces particular challenges with regard to reducing its carbon footprint.
But, he said, Ireland needs a robust response to the issue of climate change.
Mr Howlin said Ireland’s agriculture sector would pose a challenge as it was not as intensive as others.
He said he believed that Ireland would hit its target of 40% renewable energy by 2020.
While there might be resistance in some sectors to this, he said, if people looked at the recent reports on climate change they would reflect that we need to do things differently.
The minister said that the Government is obliged to submit budget costings to the EU in April, but this was predicated on last year’s projections.
He said there were recent signs of new economic activity in the first quarter with more jobs, but the Government was currently working on last year’s projection of 2% growth.
He said there might be more growth than expected but the Government needed to be prudent.
Rural Ontario tirelessly fighting the Wind Fiasco!
East Oxford group files FOI for wind farm details
By Jennifer Vandermeer, Norwich Gazette/IngersollTimes
NORWICH TOWNSHIP – The East Oxford Community Alliance wants to know how the Ministry of the Environment has been handling the Prowind Gunn’s Hill Wind Farm file. The alliance (EOCA) has filed Freedom of Information requests and asked the Ontario Ombudsman to look into it because of the number of changes that have been made to the project without due process for the public to participate.
Joan Morris, spokesperson for EOCA, said one issue is the “substantive changes” to the project since it was first filed with the MOE and considered complete and accurate. “A change to the project area was announced to the public only four days before the application was deemed complete by the Ministry on February 7, 2014,” Morris also said in a press release. “Apart from a cover page from the Ministry of Environment, none of the documents for public review and comment were modified to account for the changes.”Read article
Another Family Forced to Give Up Their Home!
Couple gets $1.3M in wind turbine settlement
MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — A Vermont couple whose Northeast Kingdom farm became a focal point in the fight against construction of a 21-turbine industrial wind project on Lowell Mountain said Monday that they were selling their 540-acre farm to Green Mountain Power for $1.3 million.
In announcing they had agreed to settle a lawsuit over a boundary dispute filed against them by GMP, Don and Shirley Nelson said they felt they could have won in court, but it would not have led to the removal of the now-operating turbines.
Even if victorious in court, it’s doubtful they would have received more than the $1.3 million they will get for the sale of their property and the legal case could have lingered for years, the Nelsons said.
“The Nelsons intend to move from their farm to a location well away from the turbines,” their statement said.
In a separate statement, GMP said the Nelsons will be able to remain in their home for up to two years and that they will retain 35 acres of land in Albany.
“The agreement meets the needs of the Nelsons as well as those of our customers,” GMP said. “Kingdom Community Wind is an important part of our growing investment in renewable energy in Vermont.”
The construction and operation of what has become the Kingdom Community Wind project generated fierce opposition from a number of people who claimed the project marred the pristine ridgeline for no environmental benefit.
The Nelsons were longtime opponents of the project.
The 2011 lawsuit grew out of a series of protests along the contested property line between the Nelsons’ land and the then-under-construction turbine site controlled by GMP. A number of protesters set up camp on land they claimed was owned by the Nelsons, but within a safety zone during construction blasting operations. The presence of the protesters caused brief delays in construction.
The Nelsons and GMP had disputed the property boundary of land GMP has under a long-term lease for the wind project. A trial had been tentatively scheduled for August.
In a separate statement, a group opposing the wind project called the Ridge Protectors said the Nelsons typify the Vermont dream of working hard, paying taxes and minding one’s own business.
“Now, we have to add, and be forced off your property by a foreign-owned corporation,” the organization said, referring to the fact that GMP’s corporate parent is Canadian. “Yes, they were paid for that property, but money runs a poor second to beauty, peace, quiet and a love for your land.”
Not all Physicians are afraid to tell the truth!
BRITISH MEDICAL PRACTITIONER IN THE ENERGY FIELD FOR OVER 32 YEARS SAYS TURBINES DO AFFECT HEALTH
Letter to the Editor – Blackmore Vale Magazine — April 6, 2014
I strongly contest Dr Erik Blakeley‘s comments in your recent article calling wind turbine noise as a placebo effect. As a medical practitioner in the energy field of over 32 years I disagree.
I have amassed over the last few years negative health evidence from across the globe wherever wind turbines are erected, many locals even supported their erection initially only to find their health began to deteriorate afterwards.
Apart from Canadian, American, Danish and Australian information I have articles from specialists in “sleep disorder“ from the BMJ (British Medical Association) referring to ‘wind turbine syndrome‘ . It is the ULF (Ultra Low Frequency)or ELF vibrations that cause the most harm and cannot be heard. Can Dr Blakeley deny the MoD developed and used these frequencies for “acoustic warfare“ and in Russia ULF was developed by Vladimir–Gavreau for use in the Cold War of the 1950s onward only to be banned because it was so devastating on the human organism!
We must remember each person is an individual, some more sensitive than others and this has to be respected. The global evidence that amasses are that the main symptoms are insomnia, elevated blood pressure, depression, irritability and even suicide, never mind the effects on epileptics and hyperactive children. As our whole world is comprised of energy, we live in a time of Einstein and Quantam Physics not Newton, so as to accuse locals as “fools to their symptoms“ is not only utterly insulting to their intelligence but also ignores their individual health susceptibility.
Mrs S.Gonzalez BA.,MCH.,R.S.Hom,Milborne St Andrew
Our children are their target!
STUDENTS WHO QUESTION GLOBAL WARMING GET FAILING MARKS
The Corruption of Science by Our Educators
When I went to school back in the 60′s and 70′s, I remember we were encouraged to question, examine and explore EVERYTHING, not just in science, but in other subjects as well. In fact, I remember one of my favourite high school teachers — Ted Bridle — really pushed us to look at things in ways that was not conventional or necessarily the accepted view.
This has stuck with me for my entire life and I always appreciate the fact that he got us to strive to be different. I’ve had a disdain for blind lemming followers my entire life, so whether it’s just a natural part of my personality that was bolstered by Mr. Bridle, I don’t know. That’s why the first time I heard Al Gore say that the “science was settled”, my brain immediately went into high alert.
This is the reason that this particular news article out of Britain bothers me so much. Any time our kids are moulded into little Stepford wives, I have a major problem with it. Our schools are no longer education facilities, but have become Liberal indoctrination centres. 30 years from now, I imagine all students will be wearing grey uniforms with their hair tightly tied back or cut short, snapping to attention whenever their ‘teacher’ barks a command.
Instead of being progressive with our schools, we’ve actually digressed a hundred years or so, to a time when you didn’t dare question religion.
We’ve seen the results of one whole generation that has come through this indoctrination process. Is it too late to correct the harm that is being done to their minds? – DQ
***************
Christopher Booker — The Telegraph (UK) — April 12, 2014
Brainwashing about global warming percolates throughout the education system
Not often does a senior Cabinet minister declare that a policy long pursued by his own department is “against the law”. But that was the response of Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, to a report exposing just how profoundly our education system has been hijacked by promoters of the official group-think on global warming.
Expanding on a theme touched on here more than once over the years, the report for the Global Warming Policy Foundation by Andrew Montford and John Shade shows how generations of schoolchildren have been taught to accept as gospel nothing but a propagandist, Greenpeace-type view of the global-warming scare, so one-sided that it makes a mockery of the requirement under the 1996 Education Act that pupils only be taught in a balanced way, allowing them to form their own view of the evidence.
So relentless is this brainwashing that it percolates throughout the curriculum, so that even exam papers in French, English or religious studies can ask students to explain why the world is dangerously warming up, or why we must build more wind turbines. In 2012, I described an A-level general studies paper set by our leading exam board, AQA, asking for comment on 11 pages of propagandist “source materials”, riddled with basic errors.
A mother wrote to tell me how her intelligent son, after getting straight As on all his science papers, used his extensive knowledge of climate science to point out all their absurd distortions. Continue reading here….
"Mothers Against Wind Turbines™" Phoenix Rising... 