News   Sep 26, 2024
The Bentway Announces Design Team for Major Expansion Under the Gardiner Expressway
 517     0 
News   Sep 26, 2024
Live Nation Announces Temporary Rogers Stadium at Downsview, Setting the Stage for Future Development
 1.1K     3 
News   Sep 26, 2024
Sapphire Brings Cross-Laminted Timber to Barrie's Rainwater Development
 675     0 

Windfarms & Energy capacity

Whoaccio

Whoaccio

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
0
(Toronto Issues or Infrastructure?)

Apparently there is a storm a brewin' over Toronto Hydro's proposal to consider constructing an offshore anemometer about 2km out from the Bluffs. Personally, I think completely logical to at least study the area to see if windpower could be feasible. NIMBYing a research project is a new low. Study the feasibility, and then asses the project based on its merits.

The entire windmill fiasco is rubbish to begin with. The arguments have become so facile and childish it boggles the mind. Bird strikes? Every EA commissioned on windmills show that the risk to birds is far lower than most human activities from driving, to windows to domesticated cats (yes, Fluffy is a bigger threat to birds than a 100m windmill). Aesthetically, I find them pleasing, though I suppose this is a personal thing. In any case, I don't think it is a right to not see tall things. Roadways are louder than windmills at ground level, let alone 2km offshore, yet nobody in their right mind would file a noise pollution suit against a Lawrence Ave.

Cost and economics of this area is impossible to determine, especially if the feasibility study is NIMBYed. If it is feasible though, I say build it and screw the NIMBYs.
 
You know why the environment never wins? Because when the government/cities finally get coaxed into doing something good for the environment, some selfish morons go and opposes those developments because they don't like how it looks from their backyard... utterly pathetic.


(oh and about the birds argument, well let's keep pumping more C02 out there instead of renewable energy and we'll see if their numbers stay up. I'd be thinking they are better off dodging a windmill than choking to death in our pollution).
 
The thing that amazes me is not that people are opposing windmills. Stupid as it is, nowadays it seems any project of any size or description will have a gaggle of NIMBYs giving their song and dance about "declining property values" "my view will be ruined" and, my personal favorite, "electro magnetic radiation" (too many people have been watching GoldenEye, methinks). What really amazes me about this is that people are opposing the study of windmills. Fine, maybe windmills don't make economic sense. The only way we could possible know is if we build anemometers to take wind measurements. If people are so confident that wind is a black hole of funding, they should at least support the feasibility study to prove their accusations.
 
I blame a lot of things: the lack of civics courses in public high schools and the decline in science instruction (EMF radiation would not be a palpable excuse in a society where everyone has at least some science education), 28years of championing neo-conservative libertarian values that taught everyone that nothing is as sacrosanct as your property value and to hell with public amenities. I bet I'd come up with dozens of other reasons, but I don't want to ruin my afternoon thinking about them.
 
I even heard people complaining about the noise of the wind turbines, though I haven't heard much from the one at the CNE on a quiet day.

Personally, I would like to see a wind turbine at each and every TTC carbarn or garage, now or to come.

And if no run-away truck could hit the towers, I would like to see the turbines along the 401. Should be quieter than the current traffic noise.
450_pigs_chaos_0804142.jpg

New grass cutting service
 
Whoaccio said:
Aesthetically, I find them pleasing, though I suppose this is a personal thing. In any case, I don't think it is a right to not see tall things.
Click to expand...
I don't even know where this argument comes from. How are the cooling towers at power plants or coal smokestacks any prettier?

Ontario's lakes have a lot of wind power generating capacity. Trillium Power is trying to push a bigger project through, 'Wind 1', situated far enough offshore that nobody can complain about noise or aesthetics.
 
Last edited:
I agree that they can be quite pretty. When I drove through Alberta last year on my way to a wedding in Waterton Lakes National Park, I thought the windfarms down there were gorgeous. And there were lots of them.

Drive10.jpg
 
Hipster Duck said:
I blame a lot of things: the lack of civics courses in public high schools and the decline in science instruction (EMF radiation would not be a palpable excuse in a society where everyone has at least some science education), 28years of championing neo-conservative libertarian values that taught everyone that nothing is as sacrosanct as your property value and to hell with public amenities. I bet I'd come up with dozens of other reasons, but I don't want to ruin my afternoon thinking about them.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't "neo-conservative libertarian values" only further the cause of windmills? If a central theme of libertarianism is property rights, wouldn't that imply that it is Toronto Hydro's, or whoever, right to develop windmills on their land? A surprising amount of hissing can be heard from groups like the Lake Ontario Waterkeepers and a very distinct group of environmentalists who oppose, just about, everything. From what I have seen, most windfarms tend to get NIMBYed by the 'do nothing' school of environmentalism, which opposes anything resembling civilization.
 
The Guildwood community is particularly bad for NIMBYism. This is the group that fought vehemently with a local church and Bell Canada to stop a cell phone tower from being built. No offence intended but there are a lot of retirees in the neighbourhood who have nothing much to do but weed their gardens and fight against change.

I've read many of the arguments against this research project, and they are all about windmills, supposedly the end result. They are also unintelligible and classic NIMBY, such as "it will be like an airport runway 24/7 with all the lights","it will tarnish my view", and "what about the birds" (despite the fact that these people curse the seagulls every chance they get.)

Unfortunately it's a vocal minority that are against the project, and I hope that Toronto Hydro will set the record straight at this meeting tonight.

The windmills, if ever built, would be more than 10km offshore for pete's sake!
 
Whoaccio said:
Shouldn't "neo-conservative libertarian values" only further the cause of windmills? If a central theme of libertarianism is property rights, wouldn't that imply that it is Toronto Hydro's, or whoever, right to develop windmills on their land?
Click to expand...

In theory it would certainly imply that, but in a world of inherently selfish people who are unable to see the world beyond their own picket fence, libertarianism has given rise to this conflated sense of inalienable private rights without public duties.

A surprising amount of hissing can be heard from groups like the Lake Ontario Waterkeepers and a very distinct group of environmentalists who oppose, just about, everything. From what I have seen, most windfarms tend to get NIMBYed by the 'do nothing' school of environmentalism, which opposes anything resembling civilization.
Click to expand...

Tell me about it. By the way, the word "environmentalist" is dead, or else it's basically only used in the pejorative sense. Environmentalism basically got married to negativity: opposition, activism, being shrill.

I'm a grad student studying sustainability and I keep reminding people that I'm more interested in life cycle assessments and social equity than opposing things on specious grounds. We need to come up with a term for people who are interested in environmental advocacy without all the negativities associated with environmentalism. "Sustainabilitarian?" or maybe just "Environmental advocate"? I dunno.

Anyway, I want to be called an "environmentalist" about as much as an African American wants to be called a negro.
 
Archivist said:
I agree that they can be quite pretty. When I drove through Alberta last year on my way to a wedding in Waterton Lakes National Park, I thought the windfarms down there were gorgeous. And there were lots of them.
Click to expand...

You don't even have to go that far out; just day-trip out NW of Shelburne, or along the Erie shore around Port Burwell...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top