The blades are each 45 meters (148 ft.) long in themselves, making the effective diameter of the blade rotation 90 (almost 300 ft.) meters. The height of the wind plant mast is 80 meters (or 262.5 feet). The total height of mast and blade will be (80+45) 125 meters (approximately 415 ft.)
Kingston's waterfront views will be changed
The Kingston waterfront views will be negatively impacted by the the 186 proposed turbines to be placed on Wolfe and Amherst Islands by Calgary-based Canadian Hydro Developers Incorporated.
Residents and tourists to the Kingston area will watch these turbines from their homes, offices, boats, hotel and restaurant patios. The project will strongly impact the views of Fort Henry (a UNESCO Heritage site), Confederation Basin, Olympic Harbour, Queen’s University and other culturally significant sites.
Residents and valued visitors to the area have a high expectation of experiencing a historically intact landscape and the viewing of 186 turbines is incongruent to this.
At present, Kingston is considered a premier fresh-water sailing destination world-wide. The Kingston Yacht Club and CORK have major concerns that these turbines may have negative effects on fresh-water sailing in Kingston. The placement of 186 turbines is likely to change wind patterns, as well as visually changing the sailing perspective from a natural setting to that of an industrial scale power plant.
Developer is using inappropriate siting for Wolfe Island
There are wind energy industry protocols in place in many jurisdictions to optimize energy production and mitigate the negative impact of wind industry on landscape coherence.
However, there is little evidence that the firm behind the Wolfe Island wind factory proposal has paid any attention to these developments.
Smaller turbines have been shown to have less negative impact on the landscape than larger turbines; but the influence of size has been found to be relatively small compared with the influence of the number of units. Planners now favour the installation of fewer larger turbines. The Nova Scotia government, for example, acknowledges that the spatial extent of a wind farm should be in context with the existing landscape and should not overly dominate a landscape.
Setback recommendations have been ignored by the company, as has Wolfe Island’s significance as a Important Bird area.
There are currently 86 turbines proposed for WI, see maps below for locations
Does wind power work?
Wind power is not reliable or efficient. And your tax dollar is being used to SUBSIDIZE this expensive source of alternative energy.
The public is also forced to pay heavily for this dubious source of energy through huge power rate increases—11 cents per kWh compared to 6.3 cents per kWh. In other words, the public is forced to subsidize wind factories to make them profitable for developers. (David Lee, Presentation to Kingsville Town Hall, October 2006)
Check out these facts from the presentation made by Mr. David Lee to Kingsville Town Hall Meeting.
Mr. Lee is a professional engineer who holds a PhD in engineering—and he is the son of an engineer who had a long career with Ontario Hydro. He has a strong interest in energy-related matters—particularly in the supply and cost of electricity. Mr. Lee's sources are listed at the end of his presentation.
the bottom line?
1. Wind energy is ONLY VERY MARGINALLY GREEN ENERGY—that is, that portion of the energy from wind energy factories with which the fossil-fuel, nuclear and hydro-generation plants can be synchronised without losing network balance—about 3 to 5 per cent of total energy generated for OPG by wind factories—will be truly green energy.
2. No amount of wind energy will enable the shutdown of any existing power generating station in Ontario.
3. Despite the small amount of wind energy that the network can use, the public is being forced to pay a huge price in the form of capital grants for the installation of wind energy factories . . . they are zoned industrial and are larger and noisier than many factories. They cause more pollution to be generated so that they can exist.
4. The public is also forced to pay heavily for this dubious source of energy through huge power rate increases—11 cents per kWh compared to 6.3 cents per kWh. In other words, the public is forced to subsidise wind factories to make them profitable for developers.
5. There will be huge maintenance costs born by OPG—and hence the public—resulting from the need to crank fossil-fuelled power plants up and down that were never designed for that type of operation.
6. Depending on the contracts they have with the Province, wind factory operators may be paid when the energy they generate is not used—or they may not be paid for it—more subsidisation with public money! That is the European experience. Wind energy factories can only be used for 10 to 25 per cent of their theoretical capacity and supply about 3 to 5 per cent of the energy needed on the grid.
What is the rest of the world doing about turbines?
DENMARK
Stopped all wind energy factory development on land or near shore.
NORWAY
Studied the Danish experience and cancelled all wind energy factory plans
IRELAND
Placed a moratorium on all new wind farm development
SCOTLAND AND WALES
Significant impact on revenue from the tourist industry and is now rejecting 95 per cent of applications for land-based and shore-based wind energy factories. Now 8 to 40 km off shore
SPAIN
Began withdrawing subsidies for wind factories in 2002. In 2006 ended by “emergency decree” all subsidies for wind factories. When subsidies are cancelled most wind factories shut down as production of wind energy is not cost effective
SWITZERLAND
Is also cutting subsidies. Why? Wind energy is too expensive for the benefit.
NETHERLANDS
Decommissioned 90 turbines in 2004. Is now placing turbines 8 to 40 km offshore
JAPAN
Japanese Utilities have severely limited the wind power they will buy—effectively shutting down many wind energy factories
AUSTRALIA
Reduced the level of renewable energy the utilities must buy
