Worrying about windmills

Conservative MPs Bev Shipley, Larry Miller and Garry Schellenberger support a moratorium on wind turbine development until Health Canada’s study is completed.

Speaking from his cottage at Grand Bend, Schellenberger said he and other members of the Conservative rural caucus took their constituents’ concerns about wind farms to Minister of Health Leona Aglukkaq. ”It’s a big issue all over Ontario, not just in Perth-Wellington,” he said “In Huron and Bruce they are very concerned and in eastern Ontario – it’s all over the place.”

He recalled attending a meeting in Sebringville about a year ago and hearing presentations about the health effects on people and “about how it has ruined their lives.” ”We took it to the minister over the course of the year and we did request something be done by Health Canada — that a proper study be done so that everyone can be heard and we can work on scientific evidence.”

“It’s not just a question-and-answer form. It (the study) will be quite involved and I look forward to that. My concern with this is that’s it’s done properly and that when the results come out that either side — there are two sides to this — that whatever the findings are the differences can be resolved.”

See previously: All politics is local wind turbines and Wind turbines and the need for consultation and evidence




Browse

Worrying about windmills

  1. Windmills have already been studied to bits….this is just the oil-shills kicking in. And the backbench ass-kissers.

    • Of course you have proof of this…

    • Ya, Health Canada is an arm of the oil and gas industry. Federal government scientists have always hated the environment and science.

      • Told you before I don’t talk to govt trolls….sorry

        • Damnit, you got me. Calling me a troll will always win an argument. You just make so many excellent points. Happy Trolling, Troll!

          • Well you’re blatantly obvious….and I’m not interested in your games

          • I’m “blatantly obvious”? What is that supposed to mean? That it’s blatantly obvious that I’m right? If you’re going to troll, you should at least try to make some damn sense, Troll.

          • It means you’re blatantly obvious…..you are a very aggressive poster, storming into other people’s conversations out of the blue…. instantly attacking the commenter and usually managing to include at least one lie and buzz word in your opening line. You add others as you go along

            It’s an attempt to put the other person on the defensive, and divert the conversation….sorry, not playing.

          • It’s a fu*#$ing DISCUSSION board! It’s meant for people to DISQUS the subject matter. If you want some place where you can just post your usual lies unchallenged, I’d suggest you find another forum. I’ll call out anybody who’s lying, it’s just that you do it so damn frequently. Are you sad that people don’t just let you get away with your BS? Good. Cause it’ll continue.

            You can call me an “aggressive poster”, but I’d point out to anybody who cares to listen that you are far, far, far more “aggressive”, seeing as you’ve left more comments on this site than any other single user. But sure, you can accuse me of being “aggressive”, it just makes you look like the lying, dull, troll that you are.

          • Actually it’s a blog with a comment section…..comment….not attack.

            Now then…..flick

          • To quote your favorite source, Wikipedia:
            “A blog is a discussion or information site…”

            But continue to spin your wheels and look like a fool.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blog

          • The word ‘comments’ is at the top of the page here.

            The difference is…..everyone else comments on the topic, you comment on the poster.

        • I’m not playing any games, troll… you are. I pointed out that you’re calling Health Canada oil-shills, and you’ve been unable to formulate a response. Keep trolling.

          • Lying won’t make you sound any better Rick…..go find something else to do.

          • Still pretending that Health Canada made the decision to launch this study, NotRick?

          • I have no idea who decided to launch it, do you? Care to provide any information on that?

          • Ah, you don’t know who made the decision. But that hasn’t stopped you from implying that criticizing the decision is criticism of Health Canada scientists.
            “This study is in response to questions from residents living near wind
            farms about possible health effects of low frequency noise generated by
            wind turbines,” said the Honourable Leona Aglukkaq, Minister of Health.
            “As always, our Government is putting the health and safety of Canadians
            first and this study will do just that by painting a more complete
            picture of the potential health impacts of wind turbine noise.”
            http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/_2012/2012-109-eng.php

          • You linked to a press release quoting the Minister of Health speaking on behalf of Health Canada…. I’m not sure I get your point.

            *My point* however, is that Health Canada decided to do the study, weather at the urging of the Minister or not, it’s still Health Canada.

            But whatever, semantics I guess. I think most people see the hypocrisy in claiming that the government of the day is “anti-Science”, and then complaining whenever they decide to do a scientific study of something. But let me guess, it’s because “the science is settled”, isn’t it?

          • It remains to be seen how scientific it will be. Interesting to see they’re going to use Statscan.

          • Nice try, NotRick. The Conservative Government decided to do the study. You know, the one that is putting the health and safety of Canadians first. There’s nothing “semantic” about it. It’s not a decision that was made by scientists, despite your dissembling.

      • Federal government scientists made the decision to launch this study? Do tell Rick.

  2. I’ll be interested in what they consider ‘done properly’ is.

    • That’s just it, they will never be satisfied, there is no goal other than shutting down the project.

  3. There has to be a Don Quixote joke somewhere in all this…

  4. There is a faint hum. That is pretty much it. Sure, study the hum, but I don’t see a reason to halt production meanwhile.

  5. What a silly waste of time and money. Everybody knows that a “proper study” would be evidence-based science and who among the Con “intelligentsia” (read: PMO) would believe that?

      • If it were, it would be the equivalent of voodoo or witchcraft in the primitive Con mindset.

  6. I do wish there was a way to get a truly independent study done. You can’t trust Harper on this, and you can’t trust McGuinty, either. So two studies skewed in opposite directions is, I suppose, more helpful than two studies skewed in the same direction, but mostly just a waste. One thing I’d love to know for real as opposed to anecdotally, is if you are the farmer or landowner being paid the big bucks, has there ever been a case where that person (or that family) has had the averse health effects? It strikes me that this would be relatively quick to discover, although of course it isn’t “proof” of anything one way or another.

    • They WERE independent….and there were a bunch of them

      And no one paid, has ‘turbine-itis’….here, or in any other country.

    • Ya, Health Canada scientists are all partisan Conservative’s. We should fire all of Health Canada’s scientists, damn partisan toadies.

      • We saw what they did with Insite – take direction from Harper and ignore the science. I supposed it’s some sort of progress that they’re going to pretend to do some.

  7. 81% of Canadians live in urban areas. (http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=34) With the noise that goes along with urban living, are we really all that concerned about a faint hum? Usually it’s the sound of a modified muffler on a gas or diesel powered vehicle that wakes me up in the middle of the night.

    • With 81% of Canadians living in urban areas…. why don’t they put the windmills in urban areas? Because everybody would be screaming bloody murder about it, that’s why. That “faint hum” you speak of is a 100m concrete and steel monstrosity with 150ft blades spinning upto 200km/h. Then scatter a couple of hundred of those in the area, and you start getting an idea of what the “faint hum” might actually be like. Then think about how much vibration that would cause in the ground, and how it affects animals and people. Then, you might have an idea why some people don’t want them in their back yards.

      • Funny thing about urban areas, they don’t have a lot of excess space. The space that is available is expensive to say the least. But no, nobody is whining about having them in urban areas. It’s just that the feasible size for urban wind turbines is pretty small. So if people don’t want them on their own land, fine, but if a neighbour wants to do it, let them. Because the reality of society is that for the greater good we sacrifice certain things. In urban areas that means we sacrifice peace and quiet, every day, to enjoy a more efficient society.

        This health inquiry is a witch hunt, because I guarantee you that 81% of Canadians live in a noisier environment than the average neighbours of wind farms. And the difference? Wind farms have a steady sound (the brain tunes out steady sounds), whereas urban noise is random and chaotic.

        Get over it.

      • Source/ActivityIndicative noise level dB (A)Threshold of hearing0Rural night-time background20-40Quiet bedroom35Wind farm at 350m35-45Car at 40mph at 100m55Busy general office60Truck at 30mph at 100m65Pneumatic drill at 7m95Jet aircraft at 250m105Threshold of pain140

        Information taken from The Scottish Office, Environment Department, Planning Advice Note,
        PAN 45, Annes A: Wind Power, A.27. Renewable Energy Technologies, August 1994

        http://www.bwea.com/ref/noise.html

        • Oh come on, bringing dB numbers to a discussion of sound levels?

          Tons of steel and concrete! Spinning so fast! Look how high it is! As far as the eye can see! Whoosh! Whoosh!

          • A 100m monstrosity! Run!!!

        • Seriously, it is difficult to measure the incremental noise level of wind turbines because when the wind blows the rustling of the leaves increases the background noise level nearly as much.

          Since turbines have the same frequency spectrum but lower volume than roads, will we also need a ban on roads?

      • And yet people live near airports…

  8. I have written this before but it bears repeating here…
    Why does an anti-research, anti-environment, pro-oil, and anti-healthcare government research the negative health impacts of wind turbines? It doesn’t seem like the conservatives would fund research to protect the health of Canadians.
    It seems more likely that the cons would fund research to delay/shut down wind turbine projects, i.e. stop investment in the environment, increase our reliance on oil and redirect funds to further the Harper agenda.
    I don’t want to misslead anyone, I don’t beleive this is a temprary delay, if so the question at the heart of the research would be a clear.
    Schellenberger sums up the goal of the research very well, “It’s not just a question-and-answer form. It (the study) will be quite involved and I look forward to that. My concern with this is that’s it’s done properly and that when the results come out that either side — there are two sides to this — that whatever the findings are the differences can be resolved.”
    What the hell is that?
    Can you imagine if this was proposed for the oil sands – “Stop developement until we can prove that there is a negative impact on the health of Canadians; and we can get everyone to agree that the oil sands are OK in spite of the impact.”
    Ass kissing, oil sucking, corporate cronies and they arn’t even trying to hide it anymore.
    Is there any chance we’ll see enough bi-ellections or do I really have to wait the 3 years?

    • I don’t believe it’s oil-related.

      I think it’s intended as a gift for Tim Hudak. Knowing Hudak, he’ll drop it, trip over it, get a bucket stuck on his head and carry out a press conference from within the bucket.

      • LOL Perfect! Love the image!

      • The mind boggles at what he could do with this. Maybe come up with regs to ban them which would also shut down Pearson airport.

  9. LOl what a bunch of hypocrits!!!Of course they’ll find problems with the wind turbines, it competes with oil companies for energy production .

Sign in to comment.