The Lying Liberals are Slandering the Conservatives. Here’s the Truth!

 

Creating Jobs while Rightsizing the Public Service 

LIES ARE LIES – It’s been said by Liberals that we will be firing a hundred thousand people and this is not true.

– It has been said by Liberals that we will get rid of nurses and doctors and this is not true.


FACTS ARE FACTS – The public service has grown by 300,000 positions since the Liberals came to power, jobs that we have to borrow money to pay for.

– About 50,000 public sector workers retire or quit each year. All we need to do is hire one person for every two who leave so we can reduce 100,000 positions in four years.

– We’re not going to cut anything in public safety.

– We’re going to hire more nurses and more doctors and invest $2 Billion more into healthcare than the Liberals will.

– In fact, we will hire more front-line workers to improve services we all rely on.

– We will treat taxpayers and tax dollars with respect.


THE BOTTOM LINE – A PC government will hire more doctors and nurses.

– We will invest in education, improving math and science programs, keep all-day kindergarten and provide more assistance for students with special needs.

– We will replace one public servant for every two who retire and focus this hiring on front-line services.

– Jobs will be created by attracting businesses through lower taxes, affordable hydro, and a balanced budget.

– This is all good for your pocketbook too!

Please share this page with your friends and family on Facebook and Twitter. Let’s all work with Matt for a better Ontario.

Together we can bring change Ontario. 

Wynne Has the Audacity To Criticize The Conservatives Math! Hilarious!

CHRISTINA BLIZZARD - BLIZZARD: Liberals have no business lecturing anyone on math

As Someone who was Recently Unable to Accurately Count Backwards from 5, she has Nerve to Criticize Others.

CHRISTINA BLIZZARD | QMI AGENCY

http://bcove.me/fdie4hkg

TORONTO — Wonky math myths were on everyone’s lips last week, as the provincial election campaign kept up its long march across the province.

While critics were busy splitting hairs over Tim Hudak’s bad campaign math, they seem to have forgotten how excruciatingly bad with numbers the Liberals have been over the past 10 years.

On Thursday, we learned the Liberals are planning a secret bailout of a real estate deal in downtown Toronto.

The MaRS building was supposed to be a centre for innovation and research.
In 2007, the Liberals gave the project a $234 million loan, then in 2011, plowed in an additional $71 million for Phase 2.

It all went bad. The building is only 30% occupied and the government is stepping in to stop it from going bankrupt.

The building was supposed to spur the “knowledge economy.”

I well remember former Premier Dalton McGuinty holding a news conference there about seven years ago and holding up his BlackBerry built in Waterloo — to demonstrate what a wonderfully innovative province this is.

That worked out well, didn’t it?

Those reporters on the cutting edge of technology scrambled to report it on their smartphones.

It’s almost like the Liberals are the kiss of death to business.

They have the reverse Midas touch. Whatever they touch turns to crap.

“When did government get in the mortgage business?” asks Nipissing Tory Vic Fedeli.

He thinks the $317 million is just the tip of the iceberg.

“One thing for sure, this isn’t the full set of numbers, Fedeli said. “It could be the bulk of them. It could just be the tip of them.”

He wonders what side deals there are that we don’t know about.

He has every right to ask that question. This is the same party that insisted it would cost a mere $40 million to scrap the Mississauga gas plant. Turns out it cost $1.1 billion to move it and the Oakville plant.

Bad math? Stupidity? Or just incompetence? You decide.

The Liberals have been highly critical of Hudak’s job creation numbers, but notably silent on their own flawed and false job numbers.

MORE BATTLEGROUND ONTARIO:

Their Green Energy Act (GEA) was a masterpiece of doublespeak.

In a column in the March 1, 2009 Toronto Sun, the Energy Minister George Smitherman said the GEA will, “shape not only the way we do business in Ontario, but the way we think about energy and consumption.”

He got that right. Just not perhaps the way he expected.

Electricity costs skyrocketed and most of our manufacturing sector moved to the U.S.

“The proposed GEA has the potential to deliver 50,000 new jobs to Ontario in the manufacturing, assembly, retrofit and architectural sectors, just to start,” he said.

How many were actually produced?

In a 2011 report, then provincial auditor-general Jim McCarter said most of the these jobs were in construction and would last no more than three years.

McCarter also said that for every job created by the GEA, two to four are lost in manufacturing because of higher electricity costs.

Then there was the sell-off of Ontario Northland Transportation Commission that operated train service in Northern Ontario. In his 2012 budget, then-finance minister Dwight Duncan announced the government would sell off ONTC — shutting down a Northern Ontario train lifeline.

At the time, the government said it would save nearly $266 million over three years.

Turns out we got railroaded.

In her report last year, provincial Auditor General Bonnie Lysyk said not only will it not save money — it’s going to cost us as much as $820 million. It seems the Liberals hadn’t factored in hefty severance payments to employees.

The Ornge air ambulance scandal is well documented. Millions of dollars were squandered when a rogue CEO was given carte blanche to create a web of companies out of what had formerly been a public company.

But the wasted money isn’t the real scandal.

On Friday, we learned more troubling details when Ornge was charged with 17 counts under the federal labour code as a result of deadly crash last year that killed two pilots and two paramedics.

Among other things, the charges allege Ornge allowed the pilots to fly the chopper “without adequate training in the operation of that specific aircraft.”

And you’re still worried about Hudak’s math?

I think the Liberals are long overdue a class in arithmetic.

Apparently, they still can’t add. They haven’t been able to balance the books once — even though they signed a pledge saying they’d do so. We’re now looking at a staggering $300-billion debt.

Libs need lessons in history and ethics.

Then they can lecture the Tories on math.

http://bcove.me/o6e63wgp

An Impassioned Plea from a Citizen of Rural Ontario, to Tim Hudak!

(GOOD READING FOR ANYONE PLANNING ON VOTING)

Paul Kuster — June 1, 2014

I’ve decided that given the priviledge to offer my opinions through the miracle of the internet and blog Quixotes last Stand, I feel I can offer up some friendly advice to the Conservative party of Ontario and it’s leader Tim Hudak. Before I start, I want to acknowledge that Paul Burling has also penned a fantastic letter as well and touches on many items that illustrate what conservatism involves. His letter can be found here:

Follow him on Twitter as well @PaulinAjax. You won’t be disappointed.

Paul has outlined some very practical strategies for the conservatives to take back the province and rid ourselves of the scourge that are the Liberals and their wanna-be cousins the NDP. The advice I’d like to offer is the way we should be selling this to the Ontario electorate.

Many times I’ve listened to policy initiatives and statements that sound good, but are incomplete. The greatest example is the downsizing of the public service by 100,000. what you failed to do was to qualify it by saying how.  What happened was you allowed the Liberals to fill that void by saying you’d fire, FIRE, them all and they even decided for you who —  be it teachers or health care workers — all the sacred stuff. Next time , please qualify how you’ll do something, on your terms, before it’s announced.

Another example is the Million jobs plan. Always remember that the “Parties of the Left” are the party’s of misery.   Only they could poo-poo about the ambitious plan to create jobs in Ont.  They have the intellectual bankruptcy of complaining that the PC’s would have lied to us if only 850,000 jobs had been created.   Further to this is the statement that  “Every Monday morning 1 million wake up to not having a job.”  Why not take it that one step more by saying that:

 “It’s our intention that we want to have as many waking up to a job on a Monday morning as possible.”

“Remember what it’s like when you got that phone-call that said ‘You’re hired.’?  I do.  I felt great about myself that someone wanted me.   Or at that job interview when the hiring manager asks  ‘When can you start?’   Now you can look forward to providing for your family in a meaningful way.  Now you can afford to put your son/daughter into the organized sports they want. Maybe now you can qualify for that house. Perhaps now you can afford that vacation.

For too long this province has been in a funk, no thanks to the Liberals and NDP.  Not only are we a “have-not” province, but we must lead all provinces and territories in malaise and anxiety. We want Ontarians to be able to relax, live their lives and be happy and not to have a sickening knot in your gut every time you open a Hydro bill.”

To you the PC’s , get us out of our funk. Make our province proud again. Make every policy statement one that shines with optimism and leave the other parties grumbling. It’s what they do best.

There’s a conservative commentator in the US (Bill Whittle)who does a splendid job in what it should mean to be a conservative and has many sound strategies to convey that message.  One of the lessons he learned after the 2012 presidential election was
that in many of the exit polls, Romney won on just about everything the economy, foreign policy, domestic policy, everything.

All except on one question. “Who cares about you more”, and this is how Obama won it.
Learn from this lesson. Frame everything into a positive message that explains that PC’s aren’t out to eat your children or to send women into slave camps or you’ll toss welfare recipients over Niagara Falls.    Get that message through to them that PC’s do care.

Finally, here is a link to a Youtube video by Bill Whittle outlining the game plan for conservatism. It’s brilliant and although it has US examples, the theory translates well to our situation in Ontario.  To me the most important strategy comes at 5:50 of part 2. but listen to it all!

A Courageous Host Farmer Speaks Out Against Wind Bullies!

OPEN LETTER TO:

Premier Kathleen Wynne,  Mr. Tim Hudak,  Ms. Andrea Horvath,   REA

Being landowners who were fraudulently scammed into signing an option/lease for wind development in 2011, the terms and conditions of which we remained unaware until October 2013 when we were first given the document, then officially threatened with legal proceedings and financial ruin coercing us into signing the NextEra lease in February 2014, we would like to outline our experience of meetings with Company contacts (CanAcre for NextEra) in the last three weeks.

 

As yet, we have not received a copy of the lease complete with a NextEra signatory as we should have by now. May 6th a representative arranged to meet to discuss the location of a collection line . .. part of NextEra’s design for our property for which we were offered no opportunity to give input. The point of this meeting was unclear as no concerns of ours were taken into consideration, the placement of the intended line would most surely harm and possibly kill a mature windbreak of spruce and cedar and at the meeting conclusion, we were informed that in the next few days a “survey” and the planting of stakes would take place.

 

The lease states that the Lessee (that’s NextEra) shall consult with Lessor with respect to siting the Works and to act fairly and reasonably in so consulting. We had never been consulted. Ever.

 

In response to our written objection, the CanAcre representative scheduled “another look”. This meeting on May 12th lasted another 2 hours. Our concerns were discussed with construction personnel although the location of the collection line as related to the windbreak remained unresolved. We learned that no documents are provided to landowners without a specific request and from experience we can state they are often not provided after being requested. Another meeting was scheduled for May 21st to which they promised to bring documents as requested.

 

Again at this 3rd meeting the requested complete Lease was not produced. However a map we had not seen before indicated archaeological finds had been made, new information to us, finds made without our authorization to enter the land in the summer of 2011, a flint point credited with the qualities of those used 10,000 years ago. Now we could see that the electrical conduit placement was intended to avoid a large area around where the flint had been found and as a result endangered our trees. We finally understood that the NextEra layout designed in Florida was nonnegotiable and actual locations unknown by anyone until GPS points were staked. .. what CanAcre had been calling “surveyed”. Stakes would be a huge inconvenience during planting and a major problem for managing these organic fields needing scuffling through the season. Since the Goshen Project has not received REA approval and construction cannot begin until it does, we would not agree to the completion of the survey at this time. It had been repeatedly stressed that planting be allowed without the impediment of these stakes.

 

The next day the CanAcre rep phoned to indicate he would deliver our requested lease at 10 am. May 23rd and would be accompanied by an “expert in leases”…. !! On May 23rd he did not have the lease. The ‘lease expert’ turned out to be a CanAcre manager who had his own agenda, that being to spend another two hours reviewing our concerns indicating cooperation and the best possible outcomes before stating flat out that unless we allowed the survey to proceed, the proper care and attention to our concerns could not necessarily be given! This argument was lobbed strongly and repeatedly at us and capped off with his assurance that he would continue to harass us until verbal permission for the survey is given.

 

 

Since June 2011, we have been swindled, deprived of documents and information we should have been given, lied to, told one thing and then the opposite by CanAcre reps, and wasted endless hours. Of greater significance is the Horrendous Deception throughout…. that there are no health effects attributable to these Turbine farms, that they are Green, that they do not affect property values, that they will not interfere with farm operations……

 

And we know all that to be UNTRUE. The Ontario Government and REA need to close this system down!

 

Sincerely,

Bev Teeter

DownWind….The story of the Failed Green Energy Experiment, in Ontario

Sun News Network documentary Down Wind exposes

the Wynne-McGuinty green energy disaster

BY  ,TORONTO SUN

FIRST POSTED: SATURDAY, MAY 31, 2014 07:00 PM EDT | UPDATED: SATURDAY, MAY 31, 2014 04:36 PM EDT

wind-turbines
Wind turbines near Watford Ontario, February 7, 2013. (HEATHER WRIGHT/QMI Agency)

How billions of taxpayers’ and hydro customers’ dollars are being wasted, and will continue to be wasted for decades to come, because of former Liberal premier Dalton McGuinty’s naive blunder into wind energy, now fully supported by Premier Kathleen Wynne.

How it has contributed to skyrocketing hydro bills and to the loss of 300,000 manufacturing jobs in Ontario.

A 2011 report by then auditor general Jim McCarter documented how the government rushed into wind energy without any business plan, ignoring even the advice of its own experts that could have substantially reduced costs.

As a result, Ontarians are now locked into 20 years of paying absurdly inflated prices for inefficient and unreliable wind power, which, ironically, still has to be backed up by fossil fuel energy, meaning natural gas.

That means the Liberals’ gas plants scandal, costing taxpayers and hydro ratepayers up to $1.1 billion — according to reports by McCarter and current Auditor General Bonnie Lysyk — is also part of the Liberals’ legacy of wind power waste.

Indeed, while the Liberals were telling us they were replacing coal power with wind and solar energy, they were actually doing it with nuclear power and natural gas.

Wind can’t replace coal because it can’t provide base load power to the electricity grid on demand.

That’s why the Liberals were frantically building new natural gas plants, even as they were imposing, and continue to impose, unwanted wind turbines on rural communities across Ontario.

McGuinty cancelled the locally unpopular Mississauga and Oakville gas plants to save five Liberal seats in the 2011 election, which we now know could cost up to $220 million per bought riding in public money.

A new documentary, Down Wind: How Ontario’s Green Dream Turned into a Nightmare, by Sun News Network’s Rebecca Thompson — airing Wednesday, June 4 at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. — powerfully and succinctly explains the enormity of the Liberals’ wind power catastrophe.

The Surge Media production explains we are wasting and will continue to waste, billions of public dollars for a non-existent environmental benefit — the Liberal myth that wind and solar power replaced polluting coal-fired electricity in Ontario.

Nonsense. As one of Thompson’s interviewees accurately puts it in Down Wind, turbines “don’t run on wind, they run on subsidies.”

Thompson compellingly tells the story of how an unholy alliance of Liberal government insiders, wind industry developers, so-called environmentalists and Bay Street investors worked hand-in-glove to impose wind turbines on unsuspecting farming and rural communities across Ontario.

How those who tried to fight back were and are being crushed by the Liberals’ dictatorial Green Energy Act, which took away the planning rights of local municipalities.

How we don’t need the tiny amount of expensive and unreliable power wind supplies, both because Ontario has a huge energy surplus and because wind developers have to be paid for their energy first, while we dump or export inexpensive and green hydro power at a loss.

How the reported health concerns hundreds of affected residents have experienced because of the sound, vibration, low-frequency noise and shadow flicker from wind turbines — up to 50-storeys high, many located just 550 metres from homes — have been suppressed by the government.

Those symptoms include sleeplessness, nausea, migraines, heart palpitations, all dismissed by the Ontario government, even as Ottawa conducts a major study into what has become known as “wind turbine syndrome.”

The most powerful footage in Down Wind comes from ordinary Ontarians — some forced to leave their homes — telling their stories, often reduced to tears, bitterness and anger.

How on one day they were living peaceful lives in rural Ontario and how, almost overnight, were plunged into a nightmare, as wind companies turned neighbour against neighbour by leasing the land of some property owners to erect turbines, while running roughshod over the concerns of everyone else.

To me, Ontario’s wind power disaster has always been a story of urban greed, ignorance, arrogance and phony environmentalism overpowering rural interests.

Of smug, trendy, hypocritical Toronto downtowners — Wynne’s core constituency — whose experience with wind turbines is limited to one at the CNE — ignorantly accusing rural communities of NIMBYISM (as did McGuinty).

Down Wind exposes all this along with the scariest reality of all.

That the Liberals have gone too far to ever admit they were wrong, and that if we re-elect them, they’ll double down on their wind energy disaster.

 

 

Proof, for Those that Don’t Believe Agenda 21 is Real, or Being Implemented!

 

The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide

by atomcat

The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide indicators. The results will be included in an Annual Report Card.
The completed Report Card will be presented to the community at its annual Sustainable Community Day, where the citizens of
Hamilton-Wentworth take stock of their progress on the trail to VISION 2020.
Contact
Mark Bekkering
Senior Policy Analyst
Planning and Development Department
Regional Municipality of Hamilton-Wentworth
119 King Street West
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8N 3T4
Tel.: + 1 905/546-2195
Fax:+1 905/546-4364
E-mail: markb@hookup.net

6.5.2 CASE #18
THE GLOBAL ACTION PLAN PROJECT
COMMUNITY FEEDBACK FOR SUSTAINABLE LIFESTYLES
Program Name
Global Action Plan for the Earth: Household EcoTeam Programs
Background
Global Action Plan for the Earth (GAP) is a US-based, non-profit organization that has worked for a five-year period to design and
test an effective behavior change methodology for households in the advanced industrialized world. This methodology is called the
Household EcoTeam Program. The program ran a campaign called “The North Puts Its House in Order… Household by Household,”
which implemented the EcoTeam methodology in over 8,000 households in 12 countries: the United States, Canada, Ireland, the
United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Australia.
The Household EcoTeam Program includes a feedback component to support continued involvement and commitment at the
household level. In the United States, the households that have participated in the feedback part of the programs reported that
on average they sent 42 percent less garbage to landfills, used 25 percent less water, reduced their carbon dioxide emissions by 16
percent, used 16 percent less transportation, and gained an average annual cost savings of US$401.00.
Program Description
The Household EcoTeam Program operates by organizing small groups of family members, residents, and co-workers in a
neighborhood or city to work together to make their consumption patterns more sustainable. The program works on the basis that
information is not enough to produce behavior change; in fact, the program recognizes that in many industrial countries there is
an “overload” of information about the environment, which may inhibit action. For this reason, over a period of four months, the
Household EcoTeam Program organizes individuals into “EcoTeams,” which not only provide and distill information about useful
actions, but facilitate the provision of mutual support to put these actions into practice.
A Household Eco Team Workbook is provided to each new EcoTeam to give step-by-step guidance in each action area. The teams
meet once every two weeks with a different member facilitating each meeting, and are supported by a GAP-trained volunteer
“coach.”The coach leads each EcoTeam through a process of taking action in the following areas:
•reducing garbage output;
•improving home water efficiency;
•improving home energy efficiency;
The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide
•improving transportation efficiency;
•being an eco-wise consumer; and
•empowering others at the household, workplace, and community levels.
For each of the first five action areas, participants choose actions from a list of suggestions. The results of the actions taken are measured and communicated back to each Eco Team and to the community at large. Positive feedback is maximized by the coach,
the team members, and local leaders and media to encourage effective actions. Newspapers, radio, television, and bulletin boards
are used to “broadcast” results, and awards are provided from local governments and businesses to recognize success.
In the sixth action area, each Eco Team is helped by the coach to spawn two or more new Eco-Teams by hosting a gathering for
friends and neighbors. At these gatherings, the accomplishments of the Eco Team are reported and guests are informed about how
they can form their own Eco Team.
GAP observes that the Eco Team approach is a far more effective approach than merely providing lists of “things to do,” because
peer support and direct human contact is essential to sustain life-style changes. By regularly showing participants the results
of their actions relative to the other members of their team, other Eco Teams, and the community, a feedback system is provided to
encourage further commitment to positive change.
Based on five years of experience with the Eco Team model, GAP is now employing a system to establish a “critical mass” (50–85
percent participation rate) of Eco Teams in key communities so that the total impact of Eco Team actions can have an aggregated
positive effect for the whole community. For instance, the participants in Santa Cruz, California, USA, have determined that high diffusion of Eco Teams in that municipality would greatly reduce ground water consumption and the need to construct a US$43
million desalinization plant.
This “Community Lifestyle Campaign” builds on the GAP observation that most Eco Teams were established by word-of-mouth
through existing social networks. By supporting each Eco Team’s process to personally invite friends and neighbors to develop two other Eco Teams, a doubling of the number of Eco Teams occurs with minimal effort every six months. (This recruitment method
has been pilot tested with 20 teams, and each was able to form an average of two new teams.) As Eco Teams multiply and mobilize,
their impact has an increasingly significant effect at the community level. This heightened impact, in turn, creates new opportunities for positive feedback through the media and local political leadership.
In summary, the Eco Team methodology uses the simple tool of systematized personal support networks to encourage and increase
positive behavior change. In the course of changing behaviors, participants learn about environmental issues, build confidence that
they can have an impact, and inform and recruit more friends and associates.
Contact
Global Action Plan for the Earth
PO Box 428, Woodstock, New York
12498 USA
Tel.: +1 914/679-4830
Concluding Remarks from the IGLEI Local Agenda 21 Team
As the preceding chapters have described, Local Agenda 21 planning is a collective process for creating community visions and
actions to achieve environmental, social and economic sustainability. Although the Local Agenda 21 mandate was given by the
United Nations to local governments, it is the responsibility of every local organization and resident to ensure that this process is
started in their respective towns, cities or villages. If carried out effectively, these collective local initiatives will have
a perceptible global impact.

 

We Must be Diligent, in Protecting our Rights, to Free and Open Internet!

Dear Mrs. Correia,

 

Thank you for taking the time to contact me to express your opinions regarding the management and governance of the Internet. I am grateful for your thoughts and welcome the opportunity to discuss this issue with you.

 

As you may know, on March 14, 2014, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announced its intent to transition key Internet domain name functions to the global multi-stakeholder community. NTIA has asked the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to convene global stakeholders to develop a proposal to transition the current role played by NTIA. This transition has been in the making for years, and in principle it is intended to support the current model of multi-stakeholder governance and keep nations like China and Russia from exerting influence and control over the Internet. However, there is considerable uncertainty about why this decision was made and how this process will unfold. Given the Obama Administration’s record, there is justifiable skepticism about whether or not they are competent enough to manage this transition and strong enough to stand up to enemies of Internet freedom.

 

The commitment to a multi-stakeholder model that is free from the interference of institutions like the United Nations and countries that do not share our desire for a free and open Internet is a positive one. However, this is a complex process requiring vigilance and rigorous oversight because there is no room for compromise. An Internet overseen by governments will mean an end to the current Internet as we know it. There is no question Internet freedom has many opponents, including countries that advocate for greater international control over the Internet and use the Internet to suppress the individual liberties of their own citizens. These countries do not care for the current governance structure or our commitment to it.

 

The United States must vocally and vehemently oppose any attempt to allow the Internet to fall under the control of foreign governments or international organizations like the United Nations. That is why, in 2012, Congress unanimously expressed support for S. Con. Res. 50, a resolution which advocated for the bottom-up, multi-stakeholder model that currently governs the Internet and for an Internet free from government control. I sponsored this resolution along with a bipartisan group of senators, and I was pleased that Congress took a strong stand for Internet freedom. Now the Administration must do the same. Any action the Administration takes in carrying out this announcement, any proposal it considers from the global community, and any decision it makes to transition the domain functions must abide by this resolution.

As a member of the Senate Committees on Foreign Relations, and Commerce, Science, and Transportation, which has jurisdiction over NTIA and Internet issues, I will keep your thoughts and opinions in mind as I continue to advocate for Internet freedom. Thank you again for writing to me about this important issue.

 

Sincerely,

Marco Rubio
United States Senator

Energy Dept. decision knocks wind out of

proposed Lake Erie wind farm: Brent Larkin

LEEDCo-wind-turbine-barge.JPG
The Lake Erie Energy Development Corporation (LEEDCo) in May 2013 analyzed samples of the Lake Erie lake bed where the nonprofit company plans to build six 3-megawatt wind turbines. LEEDCo suffered a setback in early May when the U.S. Department of Energy awarded major development grants to three coastal offshore wind projects and gave the Cleveland project $3 million for additional development work. (Howard Tucker, Grossi Public Relations, File, 2013)

Brent Larkin, Northeast Ohio Media GroupBy Brent Larkin, Northeast Ohio Media Group 
on May 30, 2014 at 5:43 AM

There may come a time when it’s a good idea to produce electricity by putting windmills in Lake Erie a few miles northwest of downtown.

But the U.S. government has concluded that time is not now.

Nor may it ever be. At least not in the lifetime of anyone reading this piece.

Using our abundance of fresh water in ways that secure Greater Cleveland’s economic survival should always be at or near the top of the region’s list of priorities. As should exploring ways for a cleaner, greener Cleveland.

But read the next three paragraphs very carefully.

There are 534,899 households in Cuyahoga County. Installing five or six wind turbines seven miles out would generate enough power to light a maximum of 6,100 of those households.

The cost is pegged at about $150 million. In Cleveland dollars, that means overruns would push the final figure past the $200 million mark. That doesn’t include annual maintenance costs of about $5 million.

Because businesses and manufacturers always use between 30 percent and 40 percent of the power produced, the wind turbine pilot project would produce about 0.5 percent of the county’s required electricity.

Given the enormity of the region’s problems, it’s tough to justify that expenditure – even taking the long view.

Nevertheless, windmill supporters haven’t given up the chase. Even as business leaders who know how to read a bottom line have quietly backed away, proponents – led by the Cleveland Foundation – have refused to follow the lead of other Great Lakes citiesand scale back their grandiose plans.

So, on May 7, the U.S. Department of Energy did it for them.

In a stinging rebuke, the government rejected Cleveland’s application for a huge pot of federal money essential to help pay for the wildly expensive idea. Instead, the Energy Department awarded up to $47 million each to three projects off the coasts of New Jersey, Oregon and Virginia.

Cleveland received a booby prize of about $3 million for more design work.

When the wind turbine planning turned serious nearly a decade ago, the initial goal was to have them up and spinning by the end of 2011. But the warning signs about this project have been out there for years – signs many of the project’s boosters conveniently chose to ignore.

A $1 million feasibility study released five years ago this month and paid for, in part, by local taxpayers, warned that the high capital and operating costs of offshore wind would require significant funding from the Energy Department and philanthropic organizations. Former County Prosecutor Bill Mason, a prominent proponent of the idea at the time, admitted being staggered by the cost estimates.

The study, conducted by Juwi GmbH, a German company that develops wind energy projects, also warned, “In general the ice coverage on Lake Erie has a significant influence on the ability to perform major corrective maintenance. . . . Limited accessibility by service vessels during the ice season reduces turbine availability to produce electricity.”

There’s no way to spin the Energy Department’s decision not to fund the Cleveland project as anything less than a gigantic setback. And Lorry Wagner, president of theLake Erie Energy Development Corp., the nonprofit charged with making this project a reality, doesn’t mask his “disappointment” over the Energy Department’s decision.

Nevertheless, in an interview, Wagner repeatedly warned against interpreting that decision as an insurmountable setback, framing the issue as an effort to build an industry around wind turbines that creates jobs in a city that’s lost two-thirds of its population.

“So I would ask you to make sure your readers understand that, while this is challenging, we are not going away. It’s just too important for the entire region. It’s too important for our future to see if we can create jobs in the area and clean up the environment.

“We are moving forward. We’re looking at other options. We are driven by leaving this place a better place than when we came in and making a difference.”

Make no mistake. The wind turbine project is a much closer call than former Gov. Ted Strickland’s snail-speed rail plan that would have spent billions in tax money for a Cleveland-to-Cincinnati train that averaged 39 miles an hour. That boondoggle died a merciful death on Election Night 2010.

But it’s time for the folks at LEEDCo to be a lot more forthcoming about their timetable, and provide the public with a whole lot more details about how they might find the quarter of a billion dollars needed to pay for it.

Absent that, they should pull the plug.

Larkin was The Plain Dealer’s editorial director from 1991 until his retirement in 2009.

 

The Wind Scam is Sucking Billions of Dollars out of our Economies…..All for Naught!

Big Wind’s Totally Bogus Subsidy Adventure

bill and ted

If time-travelling teens from the future (a world where wind farms had long since been cut up for scrap) lobbed into 2014, they’d be “totally bummed out” at what must have happened to our collective intelligence to end up with giant fans at centre-stage of today’s “modern” energy policy.

They’d think the idea of trying to run first world economies on wind power “a most heinous error”.

And they would, quite rightly, regard the idea of pouring $billions of tax payers’ and power consumers’ money at these things to be “totally bogus, dude”.

Here’s the US News on “Big Wind’s Totally Bogus Subsidy Adventure”.

Big Wind’s Bogus Subsidies
US News
Nancy Pfotenhauer
12 May 2014

Giving tax credits to the wind energy industry is a waste of time and money.

Despite being famous for touting the idea that the rich don’t pay their fair share of taxes, investor Warren Buffet seems to be perfectly fine with receiving tax breaks for making investments in Big Wind. “I will do anything that is basically covered by the law to reduce Berkshire’s tax rate,” Buffet told an audience in Omaha, Nebraska recently. “For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.”

But while the wind production tax credit may be great for Buffet’s bottom line, it’s harmful for American taxpayers and energy consumers.

The credit’s proponents say that tax breaks for green energy technologies will encourage innovation, but they fail to acknowledge that Washington’s history on these handouts and tax breaks for green energy have consistently failed. For example, we cannot control when or how much the wind blows, and it just so happens that it tends to blow when we need it least. On average, wind energy facilities operate at just 30 percent of their capacity and must be backed up by more reliable forms of energy such as natural gas. Instead of producing energy solutions that can survive and thrive in the marketplace, we’re left with botched green energy projects that have brought us no closer to our energy goals.

If private companies like Berkshire Hathaway are not willing to jump in without government incentives, it is a sign that the energy technology is a bad investment. It simply does not make sense for the government to subsidize energy technologies that are economically unviable, while attempting to restrict other options that provide reliable and affordable energy for everyday Americans.

We’ve all heard the saying, “there is no such thing as a free lunch,” and the very same adage applies to government subsidies. By arguing that that tax credits are needed to create jobs, proponents overlook what the rest of the economy gives up in exchange.

When lawmakers give special tax breaks to their friends and favorite industries, they shift the burden onto everybody left in the tax base. While subsidies may allow wind turbine makers to pump up their payrolls, the rest of the economy suffers as a result. The subsidy diverts labor and capital away from productive areas of the economy, which slows overall economic growth. With only a 0.1 percent GDP growth rate in the first quarter of 2014, slowing down is not a viable option.

Despite the statements of subsidy supporters, artificially propping up industries has a very real cost.

Not only are federal wind subsidies a colossal waste of money and detrimental to the economy, but they subsidize an industry that is actually harmful to the environment. The alleged goal of incentivizing “green energy” industries is to help protect the environment, but with wind energy comes a slew of environmental problems. For example, it is estimated that wind turbines in the U.S. kill up to 328,000 birds annually, and, last year alone, wind turbines killed 600,000 bats. What’s more, the amount of land needed for wind farms to be effective is staggering. For New York City to be powered by wind alone, every square meter of Connecticut would need to become a wind farm.

After expiring at the end of last year, Big Wind’s bread and butter subsidy – the production tax credit – is moving through Congress again. The Senate Finance Committee recently agreed to a measure that would retroactively extend it, which is likely to pass on the Senate floor. On the other side of Capitol Hill, the House Ways and Means Committee is poised to consider similar legislation later this summer – a package that extends the expired tax breaks. Unlike their colleagues in the Senate, representatives on the committee should hold firm and ensure that this handout for the wind energy industry stays out of the package.

Outside the Beltway, people are starting to notice the tax credit’s negative effects. Led by groups like Americans for Prosperity and the American Energy Alliance, there is an overwhelming opposition to wind subsidies at the grassroots level. (Full disclosure: I sit on AFP’s Board of Directors.) Leading up to the tax credit’s scheduled expiration last November, a diverse coalition of more than 100 organizations sent a letter to Congress, asking them to let the credit expire. American families are increasingly upset that subsidies for wind energy make them pay more and more when their energy bills come due each month.

Congress should stand up to special interests in the wind energy industry and oppose efforts to resurrect expired wind subsidies. Their constituents didn’t send them to Washington to enact policies that cost jobs, distort the energy market, and drive up energy bills – but by repeatedly extending the tax credit, that’s exactly what they’re doing.

At the end of the day, competition and free markets should shape U.S. energy policy, not handouts or favors for special interests like Big Wind.

Despite being famous for touting the idea that the rich don’t pay their fair share of taxes, investor Warren Buffet seems to be perfectly fine with receiving tax breaks for making investments in Big Wind. “I will do anything that is basically covered by the law to reduce Berkshire’s tax rate,” Buffet told an audience in Omaha, Nebraska recently. “For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.”

But while the wind production tax credit may be great for Buffet’s bottom line, it’s harmful for American taxpayers and energy consumers.
US News

Bill and Ted_3_bogus