Report suggests locations for Michigan wind farms
News
From ConnectMidMichigan.com
TRAVERSE CITY (AP) -- A new report says about 20 percent of Michigan's Great Lakes bottomlands have water depths that would allow offshore wind turbines.
But most of that territory still is not suitable for wind energy generation. Turbines might cause environmental problems such as endangering fish spawning areas, or would be too close to navigational channels or parks.
The report was submitted Wednesday to Gov. Jennifer Granholm by the Michigan Great Lakes Wind Council. It's designed to guide the state's efforts to develop offshore wind energy.
It says the best potential locations for wind farms are the northern shoreline of Lake Michigan in the Upper Peninsula and the middle of Saginaw Bay.
The council plans to spend the next year narrowing down specific locations for offshore wind farms
Friday, September 4, 2009
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Energy from Oceans and Rivers
From: "The X Journals"
Assessing Impact of Renewable Power from the Natural Movement of Oceans and Rivers
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory has been awarded $3.45 million over three years to examine the environmental impacts of marine and hydrokinetic power. The project will include field tests to investigate the risks that these kinds of power generation can have on the environment and wildlife. (Courtesy of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory)
The Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory will receive more than $6.8 million over three years to advance the production of renewable power from the natural movement of oceans and rivers.
The bulk of the funding - $3.45 million, or $1.15 million per year - allows PNNL to lead a project that will examine the environmental impacts of marine and hydrokinetic power. Marine power includes power harnessed from the flux of ocean tides and waves, while hydrokinetic refers to power generated from flowing freshwater without dams. The project will prioritize the risks that these kinds of power generation can have on the environment and wildlife; conduct laboratory and field experiments to further investigate certain risks; and predict the long-term impact of full-scale energy installations.
“Understanding how harnessing marine and hydrokinetic energy can affect the environment is key,” said Charlie Brandt, director of PNNL’s Marine Sciences Laboratory in Sequim, Wash. “This work will help remove the roadblocks that currently prevent developers from putting tidal-, wave- and current-powered machines in the water.”
Some of the issues researchers will examine include how fish and marine mammals are directly affected by water power devices - including induced electromagnetic fields, noise and blade strike - and whether producing these kinds of power could create “dead zones” by interfering with the ocean’s circulation and nutrient patterns.
Staff from PNNL’s offices in Seattle, Richland and Sequim, Wash., and Portland, Ore., will work together on the project. The study will also be done in collaboration with Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, the Northwest National Marine Renewable Energy Center (to which Oregon State University and the University of Washington belong), the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth and Pacific Energy Ventures, an Oregon renewable energy consulting firm.
DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy also announced that PNNL would support four other advanced water power technology projects being led by other national laboratories. For two of the projects, PNNL will partner with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories to use computational fluid dynamic models to develop and evaluate marine and hydrokinetic power devices. PNNL will also work with Argonne National Laboratory on advanced water flow forecasting to optimize the efficiency and environmental performance of hydroelectric power plants. And, finally, PNNL will team with Oak Ridge National Laboratory to increase fish passage safety and power production at existing dams, study how fish and wildlife are affected by the variable stream flows from dams, and measure and predict greenhouse gas emissions from dam reservoirs.
Assessing Impact of Renewable Power from the Natural Movement of Oceans and Rivers
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory has been awarded $3.45 million over three years to examine the environmental impacts of marine and hydrokinetic power. The project will include field tests to investigate the risks that these kinds of power generation can have on the environment and wildlife. (Courtesy of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory)
The Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory will receive more than $6.8 million over three years to advance the production of renewable power from the natural movement of oceans and rivers.
The bulk of the funding - $3.45 million, or $1.15 million per year - allows PNNL to lead a project that will examine the environmental impacts of marine and hydrokinetic power. Marine power includes power harnessed from the flux of ocean tides and waves, while hydrokinetic refers to power generated from flowing freshwater without dams. The project will prioritize the risks that these kinds of power generation can have on the environment and wildlife; conduct laboratory and field experiments to further investigate certain risks; and predict the long-term impact of full-scale energy installations.
“Understanding how harnessing marine and hydrokinetic energy can affect the environment is key,” said Charlie Brandt, director of PNNL’s Marine Sciences Laboratory in Sequim, Wash. “This work will help remove the roadblocks that currently prevent developers from putting tidal-, wave- and current-powered machines in the water.”
Some of the issues researchers will examine include how fish and marine mammals are directly affected by water power devices - including induced electromagnetic fields, noise and blade strike - and whether producing these kinds of power could create “dead zones” by interfering with the ocean’s circulation and nutrient patterns.
Staff from PNNL’s offices in Seattle, Richland and Sequim, Wash., and Portland, Ore., will work together on the project. The study will also be done in collaboration with Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, the Northwest National Marine Renewable Energy Center (to which Oregon State University and the University of Washington belong), the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth and Pacific Energy Ventures, an Oregon renewable energy consulting firm.
DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy also announced that PNNL would support four other advanced water power technology projects being led by other national laboratories. For two of the projects, PNNL will partner with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories to use computational fluid dynamic models to develop and evaluate marine and hydrokinetic power devices. PNNL will also work with Argonne National Laboratory on advanced water flow forecasting to optimize the efficiency and environmental performance of hydroelectric power plants. And, finally, PNNL will team with Oak Ridge National Laboratory to increase fish passage safety and power production at existing dams, study how fish and wildlife are affected by the variable stream flows from dams, and measure and predict greenhouse gas emissions from dam reservoirs.
Labels:
energy from water,
green energy,
renewable energy
To All Opposing the Negative Aspects of Wind Farms
Letter from Kathleen Gidney
to John Laforet
From: Kathleen Gidney
Date: 9/2/2009 8:50:53 PM
To: john.laforet@laforet.ca
Subject: Re wind farms
John, it is so good that you contacted me about my blog. It seems that there is a move toward building "connectedness" in regards to opposing wind farms or the negative aspects of wind farms. We can help each other- with information, communication, support and possibly cooperative efforts. So often with these things it is "divided we fall" and the big agencies are not unaware of this. Let's keep the dialogue going, and if there are ways we can help each other, let's do it! Kathleen
to John Laforet
From: Kathleen Gidney
Date: 9/2/2009 8:50:53 PM
To: john.laforet@laforet.ca
Subject: Re wind farms
John, it is so good that you contacted me about my blog. It seems that there is a move toward building "connectedness" in regards to opposing wind farms or the negative aspects of wind farms. We can help each other- with information, communication, support and possibly cooperative efforts. So often with these things it is "divided we fall" and the big agencies are not unaware of this. Let's keep the dialogue going, and if there are ways we can help each other, let's do it! Kathleen
Building Connections re:wind farms opposition
To: john.laforet@laforet.ca
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Digby Turbine Proposal
John,
Dan Mills from here has been in communication with Maureen Anderson of WCO...and some of our stuff (SkyPower obituary and photos of our roadside signs) has been posted on their website.
Right now, Nova Scotia is relying on municipal governments to specifically regulate wind power projects through land use by-laws. However, many of our rural municipalities do not have comprehensive land use by-laws in place. This means that new uses (such as industrial wind generating facilities) are not automatically prohibited until addressed through new regulations. Some municipalities have enacted by-laws to specifically address this one use. Our municipality (Municipality of the District of Digby) worked on this last year and recently Council voted NOT to adopt it under pressure from SkyPower and Scotian.
Other than municipal regulation, projects over 2 MW have to go through provincial Environmental Assessment to comply with the NS Environment Act. "Our" project did that this summer and just got their approval. The province has published guidelines for proponents in applying for the provincial permits (Proponent's Guide to Wind Power Projects updated September 2008).
At some point, the proponent has to go through a federal CEAA screening because it seems that all these projects have asked for federal funding (1 cent per kwh) through NRCan.
Unfortunately for us, it seems that approvals are all politically enabled (though not scientifically justified) because of the Renewable Energy Standards legislated through the NS Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act (2007) http://www.gov.ns.ca/legislature/legc/bills/60th_1st/3rd_read/b146.htm Six wind farms were accepted by our province-wide utility, Nova Scotia Power Inc (NSPI) in the first months of 2008 to be in service by the end of 2009 in time for a January 1, 2010 deadline.
We are in contact with Kristen and Susan Overmyer of the Eco-Awareness Society in Pictou County where Shear Wind is proposing to build the Glen Dhu wind farm. Kristen's email is ko@ezfzx.com and he as a mechanical engineer (originally from Michigan) is very knowledgeable on the science of noise.
Also, we keep Lisa Betts of the Pugwash area informed. She has a blog http://pugwashwindfarm.blogspot.com/ I understand "their" project was withdrawn before it even really got going, after Anne Murray got involved in the opposition a couple of years ago. Lisa's email is ljbetts@seaside.ns.ca. Lisa is in contact with a group in the Amherst NS area on the NB border where another of these six ill-conceived (and hopefully ill-fated) wind farms is proposed. With the approval of the Digby Wind Power Project (aka Digby Wind Park), all six proposals are now approved by NS dept of Environment (NSE). Only one (RMSenergy's Dalhousie Mountain project) is being built on schedule.
Hope this helps. We do benefit from what you're doing in Ontario, at least in terms of the public's perception of wind farms and the downsides. We're still waiting for the government to catch up.
Judith Peach
Waterford, Digby Neck
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Digby Turbine Proposal
John,
Dan Mills from here has been in communication with Maureen Anderson of WCO...and some of our stuff (SkyPower obituary and photos of our roadside signs) has been posted on their website.
Right now, Nova Scotia is relying on municipal governments to specifically regulate wind power projects through land use by-laws. However, many of our rural municipalities do not have comprehensive land use by-laws in place. This means that new uses (such as industrial wind generating facilities) are not automatically prohibited until addressed through new regulations. Some municipalities have enacted by-laws to specifically address this one use. Our municipality (Municipality of the District of Digby) worked on this last year and recently Council voted NOT to adopt it under pressure from SkyPower and Scotian.
Other than municipal regulation, projects over 2 MW have to go through provincial Environmental Assessment to comply with the NS Environment Act. "Our" project did that this summer and just got their approval. The province has published guidelines for proponents in applying for the provincial permits (Proponent's Guide to Wind Power Projects updated September 2008).
At some point, the proponent has to go through a federal CEAA screening because it seems that all these projects have asked for federal funding (1 cent per kwh) through NRCan.
Unfortunately for us, it seems that approvals are all politically enabled (though not scientifically justified) because of the Renewable Energy Standards legislated through the NS Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act (2007) http://www.gov.ns.ca/legislature/legc/bills/60th_1st/3rd_read/b146.htm Six wind farms were accepted by our province-wide utility, Nova Scotia Power Inc (NSPI) in the first months of 2008 to be in service by the end of 2009 in time for a January 1, 2010 deadline.
We are in contact with Kristen and Susan Overmyer of the Eco-Awareness Society in Pictou County where Shear Wind is proposing to build the Glen Dhu wind farm. Kristen's email is ko@ezfzx.com and he as a mechanical engineer (originally from Michigan) is very knowledgeable on the science of noise.
Also, we keep Lisa Betts of the Pugwash area informed. She has a blog http://pugwashwindfarm.blogspot.com/ I understand "their" project was withdrawn before it even really got going, after Anne Murray got involved in the opposition a couple of years ago. Lisa's email is ljbetts@seaside.ns.ca. Lisa is in contact with a group in the Amherst NS area on the NB border where another of these six ill-conceived (and hopefully ill-fated) wind farms is proposed. With the approval of the Digby Wind Power Project (aka Digby Wind Park), all six proposals are now approved by NS dept of Environment (NSE). Only one (RMSenergy's Dalhousie Mountain project) is being built on schedule.
Hope this helps. We do benefit from what you're doing in Ontario, at least in terms of the public's perception of wind farms and the downsides. We're still waiting for the government to catch up.
Judith Peach
Waterford, Digby Neck
Help Requested
Dan, please forward to everyone you know in Nova Scotia......
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jean and Bill Palmer
Date: Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 7:31 AM
Subject: [windconcerns] Fwd: d'Entremonts and NextEra
Cc: Daniel d'Entremont
Many of you will know the story of Daniel d'Entremont and his family. They have what seems to be the unenviable record of being perhaps the first family in Canada forced to move from their home because a wind farm was built in their neighbourhood. In their case, there are 17 turbines in the Pubnico Point wind power development, with the closest turbines (Vestas V80 machines on 80 metre towers) located closer than 400 metres from their home. Friends from the Bruce who went to visit Daniel and his family with their trailer, described staying there as like being inside a washing machine at night.
Since 2006, Daniel's family has been out of their home, which he and his wife built themselves, and raised their family in. The wind power development was sold by the original developer to NextEra. You may recall that a few weeks back a NextEra representative spoke to Brockton Council saying that they had never had a complaint, about two weeks after meeting with Daniel. His government has taken no action to help him, even though they had inadequate standards to protect the family when they approved the wind farm originally.
Daniel is asking for our help, to forward letters to Mr. Robert Cushman of NextEra (from Florida) who is in charge of the Pubnico Point wind energy development in Nova Scotia. I plan to write him, and invite as many of you as feel called to do so to also write. It is time that there be some justice in this case. Being bought out of your family home that you developed and hoped to stay in is bad enough, as you loose your memories, but at least it would allow Daniel and his family to start rebuilding a future, hopefully distant from wind turbines.
Bill Palmer
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Daniel d'Entremont"
Date: August 31, 2009 9:25:56 PM EDT (CA)
To: palmer.b@bmts.com
Subject: d'Entremonts and NextEra
Hi Bill,
Today I spoke with Robert Cushman from NextEra.He's in charge of the Pubnico Point windfarm as well as a number of others.He's the one who sent Winston Kutte,Nicole Geneauand Josie Hernandez to Pubnico.Last week he was travelling with Mitch Davidson who is the CEO of NextEra Energy Resources.I've been trying to speak with Mitch Davidson but Robert Cushman says "that's not going to happen".
Robert Cushman told me that they were sending more people to Pubnico to determine if our land and house would be useable for the company.They are suposed to send me a letter stating their intention to revisit our location.They may get down here in late september.He even mentionned speaking with our realtor.We've been waiting for a breakthrough for so long now it's difficult to put our hopes up.
We were thinking that perhaps if many people were to write,email or phone Robert Cushman,he might just want to get this over with as soon as possible.Would you and others contact Rob Cushman on our behalf imploring him to buy our property.Everyone should do it in their own unique style.
Robert Cushman
NextEra Energy Resources
700 Universe Blvd Mail Stop
FEJ/JB Juno Beach
Florida
33408
(561)304-5362
robert.cushman@nexteraenergy.com
In South West Nova Scotia we are having a problems in a number of lakes with a blue green algae growing.Many people are blaming it on the run off from nearby mink ranches.It makes these lakes unsafe for swimming and recreation.There is a new mink ranch being proposed near a spring fed lake which is crystal clear.There is a lot of opposition to this mink ranch.At one of the public meetings our realtor spoke up and said that "she had a property near a windfarm that was impossible to sell and this mink ranch would be another albatross".This was broadcast over the radio all day long.I even recorded it.She got her point across.It didn't do us any good but probably didn't do any harm either.
Thank You,
Daniel
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jean and Bill Palmer
Date: Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 7:31 AM
Subject: [windconcerns] Fwd: d'Entremonts and NextEra
Cc: Daniel d'Entremont
Many of you will know the story of Daniel d'Entremont and his family. They have what seems to be the unenviable record of being perhaps the first family in Canada forced to move from their home because a wind farm was built in their neighbourhood. In their case, there are 17 turbines in the Pubnico Point wind power development, with the closest turbines (Vestas V80 machines on 80 metre towers) located closer than 400 metres from their home. Friends from the Bruce who went to visit Daniel and his family with their trailer, described staying there as like being inside a washing machine at night.
Since 2006, Daniel's family has been out of their home, which he and his wife built themselves, and raised their family in. The wind power development was sold by the original developer to NextEra. You may recall that a few weeks back a NextEra representative spoke to Brockton Council saying that they had never had a complaint, about two weeks after meeting with Daniel. His government has taken no action to help him, even though they had inadequate standards to protect the family when they approved the wind farm originally.
Daniel is asking for our help, to forward letters to Mr. Robert Cushman of NextEra (from Florida) who is in charge of the Pubnico Point wind energy development in Nova Scotia. I plan to write him, and invite as many of you as feel called to do so to also write. It is time that there be some justice in this case. Being bought out of your family home that you developed and hoped to stay in is bad enough, as you loose your memories, but at least it would allow Daniel and his family to start rebuilding a future, hopefully distant from wind turbines.
Bill Palmer
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Daniel d'Entremont"
Date: August 31, 2009 9:25:56 PM EDT (CA)
To: palmer.b@bmts.com
Subject: d'Entremonts and NextEra
Hi Bill,
Today I spoke with Robert Cushman from NextEra.He's in charge of the Pubnico Point windfarm as well as a number of others.He's the one who sent Winston Kutte,Nicole Geneauand Josie Hernandez to Pubnico.Last week he was travelling with Mitch Davidson who is the CEO of NextEra Energy Resources.I've been trying to speak with Mitch Davidson but Robert Cushman says "that's not going to happen".
Robert Cushman told me that they were sending more people to Pubnico to determine if our land and house would be useable for the company.They are suposed to send me a letter stating their intention to revisit our location.They may get down here in late september.He even mentionned speaking with our realtor.We've been waiting for a breakthrough for so long now it's difficult to put our hopes up.
We were thinking that perhaps if many people were to write,email or phone Robert Cushman,he might just want to get this over with as soon as possible.Would you and others contact Rob Cushman on our behalf imploring him to buy our property.Everyone should do it in their own unique style.
Robert Cushman
NextEra Energy Resources
700 Universe Blvd Mail Stop
FEJ/JB Juno Beach
Florida
33408
(561)304-5362
robert.cushman@nexteraenergy.com
In South West Nova Scotia we are having a problems in a number of lakes with a blue green algae growing.Many people are blaming it on the run off from nearby mink ranches.It makes these lakes unsafe for swimming and recreation.There is a new mink ranch being proposed near a spring fed lake which is crystal clear.There is a lot of opposition to this mink ranch.At one of the public meetings our realtor spoke up and said that "she had a property near a windfarm that was impossible to sell and this mink ranch would be another albatross".This was broadcast over the radio all day long.I even recorded it.She got her point across.It didn't do us any good but probably didn't do any harm either.
Thank You,
Daniel
Monday, August 31, 2009
Turbines vs Wildlife: the Condor
From Examiner.com
Two of California's greatest environmental causes, renewable energy and saving the California condor, are on a collision course.
The explosion of lethal prop-style wind farms being built in condor habitat is putting the hard-won future of the condor at risk.
Many condors undoubtedly perish at such wind farms, although official reports attribute losses to other causes. Remember, great financial investments often warrant great cover-ups by those who stand to lose money.
Nearly 1/3 of the captive-bred California condors -- released into the wild since 1992, and closely monitored by scientists, are missing.
If one looks into the scientific literature, ‘collision’ is nearly always listed as a major cause of death to condors, yet there is never any mention of collision in association with the thousands of prop turbines, spinning at 200 deadly miles per hour, in their habitat. In fact, reports are careful to point out that, despite killing thousands of other bird-of-prey species a year, condors are, somehow, miraculously, not victims of the turbines.
Is this believable?
The leading cause of golden eagle mortality in California is collisions with prop wind turbines. (Wiegand: private correspondence.) Golden eagles are lighter and more agile in the air than giant, awkward condors. If eagles can’t avoid the blades, how can a clumsy flier like the imperiled California condor?
Photo: Wikipedia, public domain
At Altamont Pass, where nearly 7000 prop wind turbines choke the landscape, over 1000 birds of prey die each year. One of the most commonly killed species at the Altamont pass wind farm is the turkey vulture.
Two of California's greatest environmental causes, renewable energy and saving the California condor, are on a collision course.
The explosion of lethal prop-style wind farms being built in condor habitat is putting the hard-won future of the condor at risk.
Many condors undoubtedly perish at such wind farms, although official reports attribute losses to other causes. Remember, great financial investments often warrant great cover-ups by those who stand to lose money.
Nearly 1/3 of the captive-bred California condors -- released into the wild since 1992, and closely monitored by scientists, are missing.
If one looks into the scientific literature, ‘collision’ is nearly always listed as a major cause of death to condors, yet there is never any mention of collision in association with the thousands of prop turbines, spinning at 200 deadly miles per hour, in their habitat. In fact, reports are careful to point out that, despite killing thousands of other bird-of-prey species a year, condors are, somehow, miraculously, not victims of the turbines.
Is this believable?
The leading cause of golden eagle mortality in California is collisions with prop wind turbines. (Wiegand: private correspondence.) Golden eagles are lighter and more agile in the air than giant, awkward condors. If eagles can’t avoid the blades, how can a clumsy flier like the imperiled California condor?
Photo: Wikipedia, public domain
At Altamont Pass, where nearly 7000 prop wind turbines choke the landscape, over 1000 birds of prey die each year. One of the most commonly killed species at the Altamont pass wind farm is the turkey vulture.
Friday, August 28, 2009
MLA Re: turbine issue
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: Digby Wind Turbine project
Dear Mr. Mills,
Thank you for your messages regarding the wind turbine project in Digby.
As you are aware, the Environment Minister has approved the wind turbine
project on Digby Neck. The minister did include consideration of some
requests we made, specifically, requiring a mechanism for dealing with noise
complaints.
The minister did not approve three turbines deemed to be questionable in
terms of location relative to residences, although it is expected a new
application for these three turbines will be forthcoming in the coming
months with new locations.
As you are aware from your experience, the responsibility for zoning and
siting of turbines is a municipal one. I am disappointed that the current
government has not already engaged the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities
in establishing clear and uniform guidelines and planning legislation for
locating turbines. Consistency and clarity would benefit both residents, who
must deal with projects individually, and the renewable energy industry.
The Liberal Caucus met and discussed the Digby Wind Turbine project, and
other wind projects in general, on Wednesday afternoon. We are concerned
that the lack of clear guidelines and uniformity in regulations hurt both
residents and the industry. We also are concerned about the difficulty you
have had in getting information throughout this process.
I recognize that while we achieved some improvements through the EA, you and
many of the other residents, will still not be happy with the outcome. I am
prepared to bring any specific concerns or questions to the attention of the
company, to ensure any additional efforts the company can make to minimize
impact are given consideration even though the project is approved.
As the House of Assembly prepares to begin sitting for its fall session, I
will be calling on the government to do the necessary work and engage
residents and the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities in establishing clear
and consistent rules for wind turbine projects. I welcome any input you may
have.
Sincerely,
Andrew Younger
MLA Dartmouth East
Subject: Re: Digby Wind Turbine project
Dear Mr. Mills,
Thank you for your messages regarding the wind turbine project in Digby.
As you are aware, the Environment Minister has approved the wind turbine
project on Digby Neck. The minister did include consideration of some
requests we made, specifically, requiring a mechanism for dealing with noise
complaints.
The minister did not approve three turbines deemed to be questionable in
terms of location relative to residences, although it is expected a new
application for these three turbines will be forthcoming in the coming
months with new locations.
As you are aware from your experience, the responsibility for zoning and
siting of turbines is a municipal one. I am disappointed that the current
government has not already engaged the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities
in establishing clear and uniform guidelines and planning legislation for
locating turbines. Consistency and clarity would benefit both residents, who
must deal with projects individually, and the renewable energy industry.
The Liberal Caucus met and discussed the Digby Wind Turbine project, and
other wind projects in general, on Wednesday afternoon. We are concerned
that the lack of clear guidelines and uniformity in regulations hurt both
residents and the industry. We also are concerned about the difficulty you
have had in getting information throughout this process.
I recognize that while we achieved some improvements through the EA, you and
many of the other residents, will still not be happy with the outcome. I am
prepared to bring any specific concerns or questions to the attention of the
company, to ensure any additional efforts the company can make to minimize
impact are given consideration even though the project is approved.
As the House of Assembly prepares to begin sitting for its fall session, I
will be calling on the government to do the necessary work and engage
residents and the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities in establishing clear
and consistent rules for wind turbine projects. I welcome any input you may
have.
Sincerely,
Andrew Younger
MLA Dartmouth East
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
