We think of population control as unethical, but is it ethical to not respond to reality?
It’s incalculably high what this will cost us.
At least 2 Weyburn City Councillors were not duped by anti-Wind propaganda that afflicts many municipalities. There’s probably no bylaw against this family running a noisy, polluting diesel generator in their backyard, contributing to poor health of their neighbours. I’d have to reason that the neighbour(s) who complained about this windmill isn’t very bright.
The time frame given to Dustin and Vanessa Storle, owners of the turbine, was to have it removed by July 30. After this, there will be no more residential wind power in the windy city of Weyburn.
I hope they find a resident of a less backward Rural Municipality to install their turbine, and split the profits. It’ll probably work better unencumbered by surrounding buildings anyway, which can dampen the wind speed required for maximum output.
There’s probably some multi-century conspiracy from windmill owners to install these tornado generating devices all over the planet. I haven’t figured out the physics for how an energy receiving device is adding low frequency energy to air pressure, but maybe one of the crackpot geniuses in Weyburn can spell it out. They sure convinced the more gullible of their city council to fall for the hoax that wind power is unsuitable for homeowners.
Meanwhile, another municipality outside of Regina is on the verge of getting rich instead.
A public meeting will be held [Tuesday] east of Regina in McLean on a proposed wind farm in the area.
The RM of South Qu’Appelle is holding the meeting to determine if there is public support for the proposal.
So far, some landowners have expressed opposition to the project, citing concerns about vibration, impact on wildlife and livestock and other possible health problems.
The project would first require a test tower. The meeting starts at 7 pm Tuesday at the McLean Community Centre. The RM Council will decide whether to proceed with appropriate bylaws if there is sufficient support for the proposal.
The concern the oil and gas industry shows for “wildlife, livestock, and possible health problems” is world renowned. I can’t imagine how a greener alternative to oil, coal, and gas could possibly kill more.
There’s no much “debate“, because the anti-Wind folks don’t have facts to back up their conjecture.
As scientists have demonstrated in the past, the strip mining and tailing ponds employed on a Mordorific scale in northern Alberta are polluting ground and river waters.
Sorry #tarsand shills, but turns out you’ve been lying all along when you’ve said that areas surrounding the tarsands are not being polluted. You may have to be honest with yourselves before you can be honest with others. If you can’t be honest with yourselves, it’s time to stop lying to others and bow out of the conversation.
Last year Shane vlogged about ice storms. Let’s not wait until a big storm hits Saskatchewan before we future proof our homes being built today.
You can check out Shane’s website, and buy his book.
If I had $20,000 to spend on a “depreciating liability” (a car), or $20,000 to spend on renewable energy for my home, which would be more useful during an ice storm or other time of emergency? Arguably a car could be useful to remove myself from the place of emergency, but if there’s no enough gas, or electricity to pump the gas, or if the roads are jammed, a warm home would be much more useful.
Energy prices are only going to go up, so investing in energy systems today is an excellent choice. A company local to Regina that could help is Sound Solar, but there are others with good reputations also.
Picking the exact date for the end of the world, without scientific evidence to back you up, makes you a fool. Harold Camping was a fool, and unscrupulous and foolish media gave him a spotlight he didn’t deserve. With the exposure, he cheated a lot of foolish people.
It is a little depressing that professional media get swept up in ‘end of the world’ predictions from nutbars, and ignore accurate, scientific predictions of destruction. Where is the fame for predictors who get it right?
Conservatives are stalling, as they have been for nearly 8 years on both Senate reform and climate change action.
Aglukkaq unable 2 answer question about whether other sectors will have 2 do greater reductions 2 compensate for rising oil & gas pollution—
Mike De Souza (@mikedesouza) November 28, 2013
Misplaced trust, or active covering?
Actively covering for a regret-free industry, is more like it. I think she’s a liar.
It’s very important to Canada’s economy that we send a resource (we can’t use without killing the planet) to Communist China so their economy can continue to pollute at record pace as they ship unneeded goods to the United States and Canada so we can bury them in our landfills when we aren’t burning them to create electricity to power our other throw-away devices.
I’ve predicted for a year or so that the power brokers in Ottawa will soon sense that Harper isn’t their meal ticket any longer and jump bandwagons to Trudeau because they are not loyal to the toxic CPC brand, they are loyal only to power and those who hold it for the immediate future.
This includes many in the Main Stream Media too, by the way. Watch for increasing reluctance to handle Harper with kid gloves, and a fawning honeymoon for Trudeau that lasts well past the next election. The good news is Sun News won’t be able to convince its viewers that it is now loyal to the Liberals when that power shift comes, so it will take a bigger nose-dive than Harper as his head hid in the sand this past week.
Hat tips to Mark H. and Nadine L. for the image idea.
Watch how the media portrays the standoff between First Nations protesters, and the RCMP in New Brunswick. They talk about the “violent protest”. Was the protest violent until the RCMP showed up with snipers, dogs, and a phalanx of officers? Who is the real instigator of violence? Could the outbreak of it be traced back to a fracking gas company that wants to risk the water supply of the people living there?
The media can spin their little yarn to tell us it’s all about unsophisticated and violent Natives, but you don’t have to buy into their fairy tale. We know they won’t ask deeper questions that get to the heart of the cause of burning police cars. It wouldn’t occur to them for the RCMP to destroy property to cast their adversaries in a negative light. Did that happen in this case? Some people are saying so, and there’s a documented history of Canadian police doing it.
Really, why don’t First Nations in New Brunswick want their water supply put at risk, so outsiders can get fabulously wealthy off the resource under their ground?
Ten years ago, SaskPower was spending money to promote education about Climate Change.
The poster contest is an important component of our efforts to educate the public about the climate change issue. There are increasing concerns that human activity – such as the burning of coal and other fossil fuels to generate electricity – contributes to climate change, which has been associated with increased risk of droughts, heat waves and storms.
Yet a decade later its CEO and President, Robert Watson, has written the Star Phoenix dismissing a good question from a Saskatoon Community Wind representative, James Glennie, to meaningfully reduce pollution. Why isn’t SaskPower investing heavily in distributed power generation from renewable sources like wind, and solar thermal and photovoltaic? Our coal-burning crown corporation last year on its website was citing a study into solar power, conducted in the year 2000, to dismiss solar as a viable commercial power generation option. It sounded suspiciously similar to Mr. Watson’s excuses given to Mr. Glennie’s good ideas. We know technology has changed significantly since 2000, not only in computers, but in solar panels and solar thermal. Saskatchewan home owners installing net metered solar arrays, now expect to make profit on their investments, in as few as ten years pay-back time.
Instead of giving ‘Can’t-Do’ excuses for why it’s more difficult to use solar and wind in Saskatchewan’s tough climate, our crown corporation’s CEO could co-opt can-do direction from Saskatchewan people, and develop renewable energy technology right here. We can sell those adaptations abroad to other places with harsh, sunny Winters. I’m also not pleased with a SaskPower VP telling me last year, there’s a high cost for “utilities in the Northern Hemisphere” to use solar. Have they not seen what Germany, Spain, Ontario, California, and other utilities in our hemisphere are investing in? Every American border station has a large solar power installation because it’s “a high cost”? I don’t think so. Judging by SaskPower’s President’s remarks in the paper, innovation and change will come from the bottom up.
Below is a re-write of Mr. Watson’s letter to the editor, which cuts through the BS.
I’d like to provide additional information on SaskPower’s plans for a power generation mix that has served to make Saskatchewan, Canada’s worst per-capita air polluter.
Unlike fossil fuel sources, which can produce power and greenhouse gas constantly, wind and solar are not sources of greenhouse gases (i.e. they don’t cause climate change) and can meet our day-to-day requirements if we change how we use electricity. We can keep fossil fuels as emergency backup only.
Wind power is intermittent and cannot be effectively stored without innovation SaskPower is not willing or able to provide. Our province’s wind conditions allow for turbines to generate electricity nearly 40 per cent of the time, which is as much time in the day as you might directly need immediate electricity. They do not produce greenhouse gas or smog, which makes them safer than coal plants. We don’t paint windmills black to naturally heat them, so when it’s too cold outside we shut them down and lose potential generation revenue.
Solar power, in various forms, is suitable for widespread generation in Saskatchewan because the technology has improved immensely and is set to become cheaper than coal within the life-span of many coal turbines already built.
SaskPower will continue to ignore innovation so it has to invest less in retraining engineers who are really good at operating coal turbines and conventional grids, but don’t seem to have a sniff about how to create a distributed smart grid of renewable energy with a fossil fuel backup system.
Now, the real, depressing letter:
A rational mix
Robert Watson, Letter to the The Starphoenix
Published: Saturday, August 31, 2013
In response to James Glennie’s letter Blown opportunity (SP, Aug. 26), I’d like to provide additional information on SaskPower’s plans for a power generation mix that will serve Saskatchewan today and into the future.
Unlike geothermal sources, which can produce power constantly, wind and solar are not sources of baseload power (i.e. stable, constant) and cannot meet our day-today requirements due to the unpredictable nature of the source.
Wind power is intermittent and cannot be effectively stored for future use. Our province’s wind conditions allow for turbines to generate electricity nearly 40 per cent of the time. They do not produce when there is too little or too much wind (for safety reasons) or it’s too cold outside.
Solar power is not suitable for large-scale generation in Saskatchewan because of its high cost and low capacity factors.
There is certainly a place for these power sources in our generation mix – Sask-Power currently has approximately 200 megawatts of wind power, enough to power 86,500 homes. By 2017, we will have doubled our wind capacity with the installation of a new facility near Chaplain and other projects with independent power producers.
Solar power is best suited for small-scale operations and SaskPower does offer programs to encourage this.
SaskPower will continue looking at every option to ensure the future includes reliable, sustainable and affordable power.
SaskPower president and CEO
And here’s the letter that kicked things off:
By James Glennie, The Starphoenix August 26, 2013
I read with interest the article, Geothermal study gets SaskPower funding (SP, Aug. 20) and think it’s admirable that SaskPower is using ratepayer funds to investigate expensive new technologies such as DEEP. One might add to these costs the $1.2-billion, carbon capture scheme at Boundary Dam.
One wonders, however, whether Saskatchewan’s long-suffering ratepayers might be better served by an analysis of technologies that can achieve the same thing at much lower cost. For instance, why is $2 million being spent to investigate a technology that is
hugely expensive and buried three kilometres below the earth, when Saskatchewan has one of the best wind and solar resources in North America? No digging required and no carbon emissions.
Very detailed and highly sophisticated electrical studies have been carried out in numerous jurisdictions worldwide that show wind and solar can reliably and economically provide 25 per cent of total electricity demand on an integrated and modern electricity system. At the same time these clean, renewable technologies have minimal technological risk, enjoy overwhelming public support and can provide massive rural economic stimulus – vital for numerous small towns struggling with lack of jobs and depopulation.
Yet despite this overwhelming body of evidence SaskPower insists that wind and, one presumes, solar will never provide more than five per cent of Saskatchewan’s electricity.
Perhaps DEEP’s $2 million would have been better spent on an independent electrical study which sets out to solve the perplexing riddle of why it is that electrons behave so differently in this corner of the universe?
Saskatoon Community Wind