Aussies Set to Hold an Inquiry Into the “Great Wind Power Fraud”!!!

Australian Wind Industry in a Tailspin as Senate Sets Up Inquiry Into the Great Wind Power Fraud & Cross-Benchers Lay Out Plans for the LRET

tailspin spiraling

STT recently covered a motion proposed by cross-bench Senators Leyonhjelm, Madigan, Day, Xenophon; with the support of the Coalition, through their Deputy Government Whip in the Senate, STT Champion, WA Senator, Chris Back to establish a wide-ranging inquiry into the wind industry in Australia (see our post here).

It gives us much pleasure to report that the Senate voted to establish the inquiry, as moved by David Leyonhjelm on Monday.

THE SENATE
PROOF
COMMITTEES
Wind Turbines Committee Appointment
SPEECH
Monday, 24 November 2014

SPEECH Speaker Leyonhjelm, Sen David

Senator LEYONHJELM (New South Wales) (16:46): I, and also on behalf of Senators Madigan, Day, Xenophon and Back, move:

(1) That a select committee, to be known as the Select Committee on Wind Turbines be established to inquire into and report on the application of regulatory governance and economic impact of wind turbines by 24 June 2015, with particular reference to:

(a) the effect on household power prices, particularly households which receive no benefit from rooftop solar panels, and the merits of consumer subsidies for operators;

(b) how effective the Clean Energy Regulator is in performing its legislative responsibilities and whether there is a need to broaden those responsibilities;

(c) the role and capacity of the National Health and Medical Research Council in providing guidance to state and territory authorities;

(d) the implementation of planning PROCESSES in relation to wind FARMS, including the level of information available to prospective wind farm hosts;

(e) the adequacy of monitoring and compliance governance of wind farms;

(f) the application and integrity of national wind farm guidelines;

(g) the effect that wind towers have on fauna and aerial operations around turbines, including firefighting and crop management;

(h) the energy and emission input and output EQUATIONS from whole-of-life operation of wind turbines; and

(i) any related matter.

(2) That the committee consist of 7 SENATORS, 2 to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the SENATE, 1 to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, 1 to be nominated by the Leader of the Australian Greens in the Senate, and 3 to be nominated by other parties and independent senators.

(3) That:

(a) participating members may be appointed to the committee on the nomination of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate or any minority party or independent senator;

(b) participating members may PARTICIPATE in hearings of evidence and deliberations of the committee, and have all the rights of members of the committee, but may not vote on any questions before the committee ;and

(c) a participating member shall be taken to be a member of the committee for the purpose of forming a quorum of the committee if a majority of members of the committee is not present.

(4) That 4 members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee.

(5) That the committee may proceed to the dispatch of business notwithstanding that all members have not been duly nominated and appointed and notwithstanding any vacancy.

(6) That the committee elect as chair and deputy chair a member nominated by the minority PARTIES and independent senators.

(7) That the deputy chair shall act as chair when the chair is absent from a MEETING of the committee or the position of chair is temporarily vacant.

(8) That the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, may appoint another member of the committee to act as chair during the temporary absence of both the chair and deputy chair at a meeting of the committee.

(9) That, in the event of an equality of voting, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, has a casting vote.

(10) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members, and to REFER to any such subcommittee any of the matters which the committee is empowered to examine.

(11) That the committee and any subcommittee have power to send for and examine persons and documents, to move from place to place, to sit in public or in private, notwithstanding any prorogation of the Parliament or dissolution of the House of Representatives, and have leave to report from TIME to time its proceedings, the evidence taken and such interim recommendations as it may deem fit.

(12) That the committee be provided with all necessary staff, facilities and resources and be empowered to appoint persons with specialist knowledge for the purposes of the committee with the approval of the President.

(13) That the committee be empowered to print from day to day such documents and evidence as may be ordered by it, and a daily Hansard be published of such proceedings as take place in PUBLIC.

I seek leave to make a SHORT statement.

The PRESIDENT: Leave is granted for one minute.

Senator LEYONHJELM: I understand that Senate resources are limited in relation to select committees. We acknowledge that. And I understand that at least one other select committee will need to be wound up in order for this to have the full amount of resources. We accept that that is the case. The worst case is that this will operate on limited resources until March, when the inquiry into the activities of the Queensland GOVERNMENT is concluded. Furthermore, if Senator Day is appointed chairman of the committee, he has suggested he may consider relinquishing his fees as chairman to contribute to the committee’s costs.

DIVISION
Ayes 33
Noes 32
MAJORITY 1

Here’s how the SENATORS voted:

AYES, 33

Back Fawcett Madigan Ronaldson
Bernardi Fierravanti-Wells McGrath Ruston
Birmingham Fifield McKenzie Ryan
Bushby (Teller) Heffernan Nash Seselja
Canavan Johnston O‘Sullivan Sinodinos
Cash Lambie Parry Smith
Colbeck Leyonhjelm Payne WILLIAMS
Day Macdonald Reynolds Xenophon
EDWARDS

NOES, 32

Bilyk Gallacher McLucas Siewert
BROWN Hanson-Young Milne Singh
Bullock Ketter Moore Urquhart (Teller)
CAMERON Lazarus O‘Neill Wang
Collins Lines Peris Waters
Dastyari Ludlam Polley Whish-Wilson
Di Natale Ludwig Rhiannon Wong
Faulkner McEwen Rice Wright

Hawthorn v Geelong 1989

Sure, it was a close-run thing, but many a grand final has been won by a single kick.

Predictably, the wind industry, its PARASITES and spruikers have gone into a tailspin – wailing about the dreaded malady of “uncertainty” – of the kind that everyone else gets to face on a daily basis in every aspect of life and business – but from which the wind industry must be protected at all times.

But the Senate INQUIRY is just the beginning of the wind INDUSTRY’s many woes.

Crossbench working on RET plan
Sky News
24 November 2014

A key Senate crossbencher is warning household ELECTRICITY PRICEScould skyrocket unless a political impasse over the renewable energy target is resolved.

Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm is in discussion with other crossbenchers about a plan to scale back the RET after talks between the government and LABOR failed.

He fears for households if parliament can’t reach a compromise.

“The record high energy bills that people have been experiencing will seem tame by comparison,” he told AAP.

The government wants to slash the target of 41,000 gigawatt hours to around 27,000, claiming that figure will represent 27 per cent of energy use by 2020 instead of bipartisan level of 20 per cent.

Labor quit negotiations over a new target which has led to further industry uncertainty.

While the Palmer United Party opposes any CHANGES to the RET, Senator Leyonhjelm believes PUP defector Jacqui Lambie may be open to a compromise.

“If the hydro industry was given the ability to generate RENEWABLE ENERGY CERTIFICATES, it would give a badly needed economic boost to Tasmania to the tune of around $120 million per year,” he said.

Senator Lambie has pledged to vote against all government legislation until a defence force pay deal is reconsidered.

However, she could SUPPORT a private bill initiated by one of her crossbench colleagues.

Fellow independents Nick Xenophon and John Madigan both have concerns about wind turbines and have joined forces with other senators to set up an inquiry into the industry.
AAP

STT hears that the cross-benchers are acutely aware that if radical changes aren’t made to the Large-Scale RET pronto, then Australian power consumers will be walloped with fines (the $65 per MWh “shortfall charge”) for every MWh that retailers fall short of the escalating annual LRET target – a figure that will reach more than $1 billion by 2020 and continue at that level until 2031 – simply because the LRET target will never be met (see our posts here and here).

STT also hears that the cross-benchers are currently thrashing out a plan that will avoid that politically disastrous PROSPECT (for a copy of the plan click here).

One aspect of the plan is to include “old” hydro (hydro generation built prior to 1998 that is excluded from the LRET and which is ineligible to receive RECs) and use that output to help SATISFY the shortfall (see our post here).

Another is to bring in rooftop solar output generated in excess of the 4,000 GWh annual “expectation” set by the Small Scale Renewable Scheme (SRES): small-scale SOLAR GENERATION is currently between 8,000-9,000 GWh annually and still growing fast. By 2020, rooftop solar is expected to GENERATE more than 14,000 GWh annually, blitzing the original 4,000 GWh annual expectation. The plan being thrashed out now would use all of that “excess” solar generation to satisfy the LRET.

Bear in mind that all rooftop SOLAR INSTALLED under the SRES gets a fat pile of subsidies by way of “small-scale technology certificates” (STCs), which are paid up front at a guaranteed price of $40. The cost of issuing STCs is paid for by the Federal government to solar installers and recouped from all taxpayers. So it only seems fair that solar does its bit to avoid power consumers being whacked with $billions in fines for failing to meet the LRET: thus avoiding a power and tax bill “double-whammy”.

STT hears Jacqui is working very closely with her fellow cross-benchers to ensure that Tasmania’s “old” hydro gets included in the LRET, with RECs GOING to Tasmanian hydro generators (for a taste of Jacqui’s fury, seeher press release here). In that event, Tasmania would SATISFY the target in a heartbeat.

STT hears that Jacqui’s PLAN to use “old” hydro – along with the plan to use rooftop solar – to satisfy the LRET gets is fast gaining traction amongst the cross-bench Senators.

Including “old” hydro and solar in excess of the SRES “expectation” in order to satisfy the LRET and avoid $billions in fines under the shortfall charge sounds like a common sense outcome to STT – and just the kind of thing one might EXPECT to come from members of a group now known as the Coalition of Common Sense.

muir, xenophon and lambie

John Madigan

The Root Cause of the Global Warming / Pro-wind Activists Mindset: Perspective

That is the absolute truth. When I go to a large city, I feel terrible for the people, who think living that way is “normal”!

Donna Quixote's avatarQuixotes Last Stand

I was  musing this morning about why we have such an uphill battle trying to convince people who live in the cities that

  • we don’t need wind and solar power to ‘clean’ up our planet
  • man-made global warming is NOT happening
  • climate change is natural
  • the world is NOT imploding from pollution

It’s perspective.   According to New Geography and  Columbia University Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center’s  Gridded Population of the World and the Global Rural-Urban Mapping Projectonly 2.6% of the world (not including Antarctica) is covered by cities.  But over 50% of the worlds population live in those cities.

Since those who live in the city perceive urban areas to be dirty and polluted (whether they are or not — that is the common belief) that must mean, by extension, that the entire rest of the 97.4% of the planet must be also.

Those who don’t…

View original post 462 more words

Vanishing Legacies — film and entertainment on Nov. 27 at the Regent Theatre

This is a wonderful group to support!

CCSAGEadmin's avatarCCSAGE Naturally Green

Vanishing-Legacies-Save-OstPECFN will be at the Appeal Court of Ontario on Dec 8-9 defending the Environmental Review Tribunal ruling that overturned the Ministry of the Environment’s approval of the Gilead wind turbine project at Ostrander Point.  This is a precedent setting case that impacts the validity of the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Endangered Species Act and the Environmental Protection Act.  Funds are still needed to defend the Tribunal ruling.

We are pleased to announce two fund raising events that celebrate the impressive history and culture of Prince Edward County’s south shore. Both will take place before the Appeal Court date. The first event is a film and entertainment night at the Regent Theatre in Picton.  Watch for information about our second event – Dec 2, Fish Dinner at the Drake!

Vanishing Legacies: A Celebration in Film of the County’s South Shore.  Thursday, November 27, 7 pm at the Regent Theatre, Picton

Vanishing…

View original post 327 more words

Wave of Destruction: Ontario Wind Farm Neighbours in Open Revolt

Wind Turbine Victims Fight Back!

stopthesethings's avatarSTOP THESE THINGS

cornered rabbit Don’t push me cos I’m close to the edge.

There’s an old Chinese proverb that: “Even a rabbit will bite when it is cornered”.

Ontario is at flashpoint as impacted and threatened wind farm neighbours take on lying, cheating wind power outfits head-on.

In response to the malign indifference of the hard-green-left lunatics in charge of the Province (see our post here), the locals have taken on the stance of cornered rabbits and have started fighting back (see our post here).

Here’s a couple of local reports on what happens when ordinary people are pushed to the limit of what’s fair and reasonable.

More Wind Turbine Damage in A-C-W
BlackburnNews.com
Kirk Dickson
20 October 2014

Huron County OPP officers, are investigating another incident of vandalism at a wind turbine under construction in Ashfield-Colborne-Wawanosh.

Sometime between 10:00 p.m. Saturday, and 10:00 a.m. today, someone forced entry into the locked…

View original post 1,180 more words

Media spin doesn’t reflect reality

We are extremely lucky to have Prime Minister Harper. Some people just don’t realize it. Time will tell!

Leo Knight's avatarCrime & Punishment

In the past 48 hours a number of media stories have popped up saying the Prime Minister Stephen Harper “hid” in a closet during the terror attack on Parliament Hill Wednesday. Twitter was alive with those affected with Harper Derangement Syndrome (HDS) tweeting and retweeting  the stories gleefully. The suggestion obvious that the PM was scared and a coward.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Prime Minister was moved into the nearest place of sanctuary by aides once shots were being fired outside the caucus meeting room. Period. Any suggestion that this was anything else is pure nonsense.

As someone who has spent time on the Prime Minister’s security detail I do have some knowledge on the subject unlike some of the vitriolic tweeters gleefully pointing at these cheap journalistic shots.

The Prime Minister’s security detail has increased in the days since 9-11. But the one thing that…

View original post 300 more words

Brazilian Court Lowers the Amount of Electromagnetic Pollution, Allowed to be Emitted by Power lines

Brazilian Courts Order Lower Power Line Electromagnetic Pollution

RETA Lady Justice photo logoRETA Health hazard imageThe Court of the State of Sao Paulo recently determined that the Sao Paulo electricity transmission provider must reduce the level of electromagnetic (EMF) pollution produced by power lines to standards adopted by Swiss law (1.0 microtesla or 10 mG) (Environmental News Network). Currently, EMFs generated by overhead transmission lines in Sao Paulo, and most other places around the world, are at least 10 times higher than this near the lines. (For example, the EMF levels are about 12 to 14 times higher than 10 mG near transmission lines in the Edmonton, Alberta area.)

The court decision was based on the Brazilian Federal Constitution and the United Nations Precautionary Principle, which both declare the protection of health and the environment. The court also widely examined the international research on the effects of EMFs on health, and recognized “the great possibility of the electromagnetic field of low frequency to be a carcinogenic agent in human beings”.

Another Cancelled Wind Project…..Wonderful News, Indeed!

A warning for Orland: Wind developer has

history of rewriting history 

A &quotconceptual turbine layout" presented to Orland residents at an informational meeting about a potential wind project in this town.

Cashman Commnications
A “conceptual turbine layout” presented to Orland residents at an informational meeting about a potential wind project in this town.

Eolian Renewable Energy of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, recently announced that it was abandoning its Seneca Mountain Wind project in Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom. Seneca joins unsuccessful Eolian wind projects in Antrim, New Hampshire, and Frankfort, Maine.

Eolian has a history of failure and a history of rewriting history. The company’s latest revision is that it dropped the Seneca project because it lacked community support. Observers in the Kingdom don’t think that Eolian gave a hoot about community support. They say that the decisive factor was a study that revealed that the Seneca project would require$86 million in transmission upgrades. They suggest that Eolian’s respect for communities is a fiction they’re promoting to impress their current target: Orland, Maine.

The Seneca project was always a bad idea. It would have industrialized and fragmented Vermont’s second-largest habitat block and degraded habitat for a number of rare, threatened, and endangered species. The project would have encroached upon thousands of acres of conservation land. It would have jeopardized the headwaters of four rivers.

Eolian showed little appreciation for the area’s ecological value. The company’s environmental evaluation appears to have been written hastily, as if to satisfy an unimportant, inconvenient requirement. When their assertions about the area’s geology, the elevation of mountains, and distances to nearby bodies of water were challenged, Eolian’s environmental consultants excused themselves by explaining that they had used old reference materials that were hard to read.

Eolian’s website says, “We are committed to engaging and listening to stakeholders.”Their track record in Vermont suggests otherwise. Eolian kept its Seneca project planunder wraps until March 7, 2012, the day after Vermont’s Town Meeting Day. They failed to notify adjoining landowners. Their surveyors intruded upon neighboring properties without permission. Their attorneys fought to prevent and limit the participation of towns and neighboring landowners in Vermont’s permit process.

Eolian committed to leave any of the three Kingdom towns that voted against their project. But, in Vermont, towns don’t get to vote on energy projects — the state’s Public Service Board makes all decisions. The voting that Eolian encouraged would have had no legal standing and they could ignore it if it went the wrong way.

Newark, Vermont, one of towns targeted for the Seneca project, adopted a town plan that clearly stated its opposition to industrial wind projects. (Vermont statute gives town plans “due consideration” in energy matters.) A special town meeting approved the plan by a vote of 169 to 59. But, where Eolian goes, litigation follows. Newark (like Frankfort, Maine) was promptly sued by the owner of land leased by Eolian.

Brighton, another of the Seneca towns, voted 544 to 320 to oppose industrial wind development. The purpose of this vote was to guide development of the next town plan.

Neither of these votes was good enough for Eolian — they would only honor a vote on their specific project proposal.

Tiny Ferdinand, the third town targeted by the Seneca project, gave Eolian its chance. Ferdinand (population 31) has more hunting camps than residences. It is part of the Unified Towns and Gores. Eolian persuaded the UTG’s board of governors to conduct a vote of residents and property owners on a 60-megawatt project that would be located entirely within Ferdinand.

Eolian campaigned energetically, promising a bonanza. For 20 years they would pay the UTG’s municipal taxes and provide each UTG property owner with an annual payment of over $900.

The UTG stunned Eolian by voting 171 to 71 against the project.

An Eolian vice president responded by saying, “It is very clear to us that there is strong support for the project.” He hinted that Eolian would try to build support for a reworked project. Perhaps they’d move each turbine 10 feet to the west.

The UTG votes were counted in January. The $86 million transmission cost was revealed in May. Eolian announced the abandonment of its Seneca Mountain Wind project in July.

Shouldn’t Eolian have known long ago that the cost of connecting to the grid would be high? They did — a Vermont transmission expert told them over two years ago that the transmission system could not accommodate another utility scale generator and that price of connecting would be prohibitive.

Why did Eolian pursue a doomed project for so long? Maybe their investors are asking the same question.

Mark Whitworth is the executive director of Energize Vermont, which advocates for renewable energy solutions that are in harmony with the character of Vermont.