By Mike De Souza, Postmedia News July 20, 2012

“This study was finally released in January 2011 and argued that Canadian oilsands crude created 23 per cent more GHGs (greenhouse gases) than other fuels consumed in the EU and should be treated differently,” said a March 10, 2011, memo sent to former natural resources minister Christian Paradis from deputy minister Serge Dupont. “Canada believes the study has serious scientific and methodological flaws and will be passing on formal comments to the EU shortly.”

The memo, marked secret but declassified prior to release through access to information legislation, noted that the European Union commissioned the study after being pressured by lobbying from Canada to change its fuel quality directive (FQD).

“NRCan has been working with Canada’s mission in EU member states to engage in sustained advocacy opposing the discriminatory treatment of oilsands in an FQD policy, insisting on sound science and transparent tracking and traceability for all EU oil suppliers (e.g., Nigeria and Russia), not just Canada,” said the memo.

Marc Huot, an oilsands policy analyst at the Pembina Institute, an Alberta-based environmental policy research group, acknowledged that some aspects of the EU policy need to be improved to better assess the footprint of all sources of fuels, but he suggested that the Canadian government’s lobbying efforts could completely derail the European climate change plan to reduce pollution from transportation fuels.

“There might be other ways of doing the same thing, but we don’t want to see the baby being thrown out with the bath water, so to speak,” said Huot.

A March 16 memo sent to the deputy minister, Dupont, also recommended additional arguments to be sent through Canada’s European ambassador, noting an absence of information in the Brandt study on some current sources of European fuels.

A spokesman for Natural Resources Canada, Paul Duchesne, explained that the Brandt study examined the difference between the footprints of oilsands crude and other fuels consumed in Europe, but it didn’t provide evidence supporting its proposal to put bitumen, the heavy oil from Alberta and other parts of the world, in a separate category from other crude oil.

“Heavy crude is heavy crude, and the GHG intensity of the oilsands (a heavy crude) is comparable to many other heavy crudes, some of which are currently imported into the EU,” said Duchesne.

One of the contacts on the memos, Paul Khanna, a Natural Resources Canada oilsands policy adviser, was also prominently featured in previously released internal emails exchanged with the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, an industry lobby group.

Those exchanges, reported by Postmedia News in April, revealed that the lobby group had asked Khanna to remove pictures of oilsands surface mining from a promotional oilsands brochure to be distributed by the government at a global economic summit in 2009, recommending that he use a list of “proposed common shared facts” along with an “aesthetic” picture to use in the marketing material.

Previously released internal documents from Environment Canada, Natural Resources Canada and the Privy Council Office all acknowledge that oilsands producers need large amounts of energy and water to extract heavy oil from Alberta’s natural bitumen deposits. As a result, the government departments say the sector is the fastest growing source of global warming pollution in Canada and also needs better monitoring to address water contamination concerns, along with other potential damage to land and endangered species.

European officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the memos, but they have said that they have faced significant lobbying from Canadian government officials and are still reviewing the fuel quality directive.

Brandt was not immediately available to comment.

[email protected]

twitter.com/mikedesouza

© Copyright (c) Postmedia News

Original source article: Bureaucrats found flaws in oilsands study for European Parliament: Memos

But Calgary-based pipeline boss disagrees with chairman of U.S. National Transportation Safety Board

July 18, 2012

CALGARY – It will be tougher to convince Canadians to support Enbridge Inc’s plan to build a $5.5 billion oil pipeline to the Pacific Coast after a U.S. regulator compared the company’s response to a Michigan oil spill with the “Keystone Kops,” Enbridge’s chief executive said on Wednesday.

CEO Pat Daniel said he disagreed with the chairman of the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board in her harsh characterization of his company’s culture at the start of the 2010 disaster, but conceded it has complicated efforts to push ahead with the Northern Gateway oil pipeline through British Columbia.

“To cast doubt on the operational capability of a company that’s considered to be best in the world does create additional challenges for us,” Daniel said in an interview before taking a canoe trip on the Kalamazoo River, which was fouled by oil that spewed from an Enbridge pipeline.

“We just have to ensure that we explain fully to (British Columbia) residents that that was not representative of the culture and outline … the changes that we have made.”

(Reporting by Jeffrey Jones; Editing by Maureen Bavdek)

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

Original source article: Enbridge CEO acknowledges ‘Keystone Kops’ remark may hurt Canadian support for Northern Gateway route

By Paula Simons, edmontonjournal.com July 11, 2012

EDMONTON – Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

It’s an adage I keep in mind, when conspiracy theories beckon.

It’s easy to understand why many politicians, consumer advocates, and other people are suspicious about Monday’s extraordinary rolling blackouts, triggered when five major power plants went off-line during the heat wave, sending power prices skyrocketing to the maximum ceiling price, $1,000 per megawatt-hour. That several plants would shut down at a time of peak demand does seem fishy, especially when AESO, the Alberta Electrical System Operator, refuses to reveal why they failed. Gaming the system isn’t new: six months ago, TransAlta, one of the province’s biggest generators, was fined $370,000 for creating an artificial energy shortage and inflating electricity prices, for which TransAlta benefited to the tune of $5.5 million.

But Monday’s mess had less to do with collusion than with structural weaknesses in our electrical system.

Records provided Wednesday by AESO and Capital Power, show power prices began to sharply climb because of record temperatures and record power use, well before three of the power plants in question broke down.

The price was already at $597.53 MWh at noon before Atco’s 385 MW Battle River 5 generator failed just after 1 p.m.

The price hit $999.99 before Capital Power’s 400 MW Genesee 2 plant went down.

Far from profiteering, it looks as if power producers actually blew an opportunity to cash in on our insatiable demand for air conditioning.

Who were the real conspirators driving up prices? Perhaps we were.

Martin Kennedy, Capital Power’s vice-president of external relations, says their plant failed because of a malfunctioning heat sensor, which threw the plant into automatic shutdown.

“We had absolutely no financial incentive for that unit to go down. The maximum price had already been reached.”

On top of that, he says, Capital Power must now pay contractual penalties to its clients for failing to produce the power promised to them.

Richard Dixon, executive director of the Centre for Applied Business Research in Energy and the Environment at the University of Alberta, also laughs off talk of conspiracy, especially because Alberta’s electricity market isn’t a regulated monopoly, but a competitive enterprise.

“The way to look at it from an economist’s point of view is to see if they were capturing maximum profit. You’re not benefiting from the fact you went off-line. Who’s going to make money? The guy down the road. Economically, that doesn’t make sense.”

Dixon’s research into Monday’s blackouts suggests at least three plants failed because of problems with their heat sensors, which reacted to the hot weather.

Wind power also failed dramatically. At peak, wind adds 939 MW to our electrical supply Monday, the air was so calm, there were 6 MW of wind power available.

Just because there was no nefarious scheme to drive up prices doesn’t mean there aren’t problems. When electricity was a regulated utility, companies could overbuild to create excess generation capacity to be fired up in the event of a crisis. They were guaranteed a rate of return, and in exchange, promised supply stability.

Now, in a free market system, where private companies assume all risk, there’s no incentive to build anything that isn’t practically profitable. That makes the system less elastic and could lead us into occasional darkness.

According to an AESO report published this May, by 2013 Alberta’s electric system daily supply cushion — its ability to meet peak demand — won’t be adequate to handle power usage spikes. For the period between May 1, 2012 to April 30, 2014, the supply shortfall was estimated to be 686 MWh. Some pressure will be reduced when Enmax’s major new 800 MW gas power plant opens in 2015. Until then, however, there may be more days when Alberta’s system strains to meet demand.

Dixon thinks it’s time we stopped gorging on electricity and started thinking about conservation.

“We haven’t had a serious demand-side discussion in this province for years. If you want your air conditioning on, maybe you have to turn your lights off.”

Monday, it was 33 C, not 43 C; still, our electricity use spiked at 9885 MW. That’s 333 MW more than we used at our peak last July — almost a power plant’s worth of juice.

If our free market model, growing reliance on wind, and growing energy appetite mean we won’t have enough electricity on demand to cushion us through a supply crisis, maybe it’s time to have a serious conversation about just how much how much we’re demanding.

Blackout timeline

8 a.m. — Electrical system demand in Alberta is 8589 MW. The price per $14.29 per megawatt hour. The temperature is 24 degrees Celsius

8:34 a.m. — ATCO Power’s coal-fired Battle River Plant 5, with a capacity of 385 MW, goes off-line.

10 a.m. — The temperature climbs to 28 degrees C. Electricity use climbs to 9355 MW. The price rises to $125.64 per MWh.

11 a.m. — Electricity use hits 9589 MW, a new summertime record for Alberta. The price hits $502.59.

1 p.m. — Electricity use climbs to 9842 MW. The price hits $899.52.

1:06 p.m. — TransAlta’s Keephills 1 power plant, with 406 MW generation capacity goes off-line.

1:08 p.m. — The price of electricity hits $999.99 per MWh

1:37 p.m.  — AESO, the Alberta Electrical Systems Operator, issues a Level 1 alert.

2 p.m. — The temperature climbs to 32 degrees C. Electricity use climbs to 9885 MW, a record. The price stays at $999.99 per MWh

2:06 p.m. — AESO declares a Level 2 electricity alert.

2:07 p.m. — A heat sensor malfunctions at Capital Power’s Genesee 2 plant, with a capacity of 400 MW.

2:10 p.m. — AESO declares a Level 3 alert, orders major distributors including Enmax and Epcor, to shed electricity load. The price hits the maximum $1000.00 MWh

2:58 p.m. — TransAlta’s 362 megawatt Sundance 3 generator, which had been off-line for servicing since Friday, comes back into service.

3 p.m. — The temperature hits 32 degrees. Thanks to rolling blackouts, electricity use drops slightly to 9654 MW. Price remains at $1000 per MWh

3:46 p.m. — ATCO Power’s 385 MW Joffre natural gas power plant goes off-line.

4 p.m. — The temperature is 33 degrees C. Electricity use declines to 9573 MW. Price remains at $1000.

5 p.m. — AESO reduces alert status to level two. Power use rises to 9606 MW. The price stays at $1000.

5:13 p.m. — ATCO’s Joffre plant comes back on line.

5:14 p.m. — Capital Power’s Genesee 2 back on line

5:41 p.m. — AESO reduces power alert status to level 1

11 p.m. — The price of electricity falls sharply to $19.74 MWh. Demand levels to 8936 MW.

July 16, 2012

EDMONTON – The NDP Opposition will be asking Alberta’s Auditor General to investigate the how often oil pipelines Alberta are inspected to prevent oil spills, perform cleanup, and how often penalties are given to companies that fail to make repairs or cleanup. This call comes after auditors for both the Federal and Saskatchewan governments found that their pipelines weren’t being monitored closely enough.

“Both of those reports found that pipelines in their jurisdictions weren’t being inspected enough.” said NDP MLA David Eggen. “We’ve had three spills in Alberta already this year. Clearly Alberta needs the same investigation.”

Both the Federal and Saskatchewan systems audits were performed in the last year. The Saskatchewan Auditor General found that no one followed up to ensure that needed repairs were being made. The Federal Auditor General found the same problem with pipelines under that government’s watch. The NDP are asking Alberta’s Auditor General to make the same investigation.

“Now is the time for a complete systems audit of our pipeline safety policy.” Said Eggen. “Our energy economy depends on a secure system, as does the integrity of our land and water.”

The Alberta government is responsible for 411,000 Km of pipeline, compared to 23,500 Km for Saskatchewan.

Alberta’s NDP Opposition – On Your Side.

#501 Legislature Annex, 9718-107 St, Edmonton, AB. T5K 1E4

www.NDPopposition.ab.ca

Sheryl Ubelacker, The Canadian Press Jul 10, 2012 18:24:00 PM

TORONTO – Opponents of wind farms are hailing Health Canada’s decision to study the possible connection between noise generated by the towering turbines and adverse health effects reported by people living close to them.

Federal Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq announced Tuesday that Ottawa will conduct the study, which “is in response to questions from residents living near wind farms about possible health effects of low-frequency noise generated by wind turbines.”

The $1.8-million study will initially focus on residents in 2,000 dwellings near eight to 12 wind-turbine installations. There are about 140 such land-based wind farms in Canada, most of them in Ontario and Quebec.

Sherri Lange, CEO of North American Platform Against Wind Power (NA-PAW), said she is encouraged to see the federal government is finally undertaking a study on the safety of wind turbines.

“I hope it will be independent and at an arm’s length” from the government, said Lange, whose opposition to wind farms began with a fight to stop a proposed installation of the energy-producing towers in Lake Ontario, offshore from her east Toronto neighbourhood.

The study is being conducted by a team of more than 25 experts in acoustics, health assessment and medicine, including four international advisers.

“This study will contribute to an area of ongoing global research,” Health Canada said.

“Currently, there is insufficient evidence to conclude whether or not there is a relationship between exposure to the noise from wind turbines and adverse human health effects, although community annoyance and other concerns have been reported to Health Canada and in the scientific literature.”

Lange contends that exposure to low-frequency noise and vibrations — in particular, inaudible infrasound — from wind turbines can lead to sleep disorders, headaches, depression, anxiety and even blood pressure changes.

“The house vibrates, it becomes like a guitar. The noise and the vibration enters the home and it actually increases the effect,” she said.

“People have to go in their basements to sleep or they have to take a pup tent and sleep in the yard. But they can only go on doing that for so long,” she said, noting that up to 40 families in Ontario have left their rural homes as a result of turbines erected nearby.

Lange said she hopes researchers conducting the study will listen to the stories of people, many of them farmers, who say they are suffering ill health linked to wind-energy towers.

“During the process of the study, they need to go and talk to these people as I have,” she said.

“These are ordinary, hard-working people. They would not make up these stories in a million years. They’re trying to protect their land, their homes, their children, the legacy that they’ve built and received from their families.”

Health Canada said researchers will be conducting face-to-face interviews with residents, as well as taking physical measurements such as blood pressure and heart rate, and assessing noise levels both inside and outside some of the homes.

Some residents will be fitted with devices to monitor sleep disturbances for seven consecutive nights, and hair samples will be taken to measure levels of the stress hormone cortisol over the previous 90 days, said a Health Canada scientist involved in the study.

The Canadian Wind Energy Association, representing organizations and individuals involved in the development and application of wind energy products and services, said scientific evidence “clearly demonstrates” that energy-capturing turbines do not have an impact on human health.

“CanWEA supports the responsible and sustainable development of wind energy in Canada and we continue to monitor ongoing scientific research in this area,” president Robert Hornung said in a statement.

“Health Canada’s new study will contribute to the scientific literature and our knowledge base, and we appreciate the opportunity for stakeholders to review the draft methodology and study design and we look forward to undertaking such a review and providing our feedback.”

Jane Wilson, president of Wind Concerns Ontario, welcomed the study announcement and called for an immediate halt to approvals for large-scale wind-turbine projects in the province.

“We have been saying this for years as people in Ontario exposed to turbine noise and infrasound are being made ill,” Wilson, a registered nurse, said in a release Tuesday.

“We have demanded health studies, we have demanded research to back up the province’s assertion that its setbacks are safe. And yet the province issued approvals for these projects with no scientific evidence to prove they were safe. Now, Health Canada’s admission that research is needed is confirming that.”

Ontario PC Party energy critic Vic Fedeli also called for an immediate moratorium on further wind power development in Ontario.

“I’ve been to dozens of town halls across the province and have heard the painful stories of those who’ve reported these adverse health effects,” Fedeli said. “The fact the federal government feels this study is necessary is reason enough to put a halt to any more wind turbines being built in Ontario right now.”

During Ontario’s last legislative session, the Conservatives put forth a proposal calling for a moratorium on wind turbines, but it was rejected by the Liberal government and the NDP.

The proposed health-effects study design is posted on Health Canada’s website for a 30-day public comment period, and feedback will be reviewed by the committee putting together the study. Canadians can voice their opinions at: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/consult/_2012/wind_turbine-eoliennes/index-eng.php.

Specific details about study locations and timing will be made public on Health Canada’s website upon completion of the study, with results expected to be published in 2014.

Teri Fikowski, Global Lethbridge : Thursday, July 12, 2012 5:04 PM

Southern Alberta residents are demanding answers about a proposed transmission line through the province.

The Goose Lake to Etzikom Coulee transmission project is a potential transmission line to connect sub-stations near Pincher Creek and Stirling.

Representatives from AltaLink and Alberta Electric System Operator took questions from those concerned at a town hall meeting in Twin Butte Wednesday night, but the project doesn’t seem to sit well with area residents.

Landowners from the town, Pincher Creek, and as far away as Lethbridge asked representatives questions about the project and their concerns surrounding it.

Chair of the sub-committee for the Chinook Area Land Users Association, Anne Stevick tells GlobalNews the transmission lines will affect the entire province.

“It will affect all of us, businesses wise, residence wise and our power bills. If we see businesses leaving Alberta because of the increase to their electricity it’s going to hurt all of Alberta,” she adds.

The intention behind the meeting was to establish the need for the approximate 200 kilometer transmission lines.

Jason Doering with AESO says he can’t stress enough the importance of the project for Alberta’s economic development.

“The project was staged in a manner that allows us to develop the pieces as wind interests shows up in Alberta. Based on the continued wind interest that we see the project is still needed,” he says.

Residents at the meeting weren’t convinced and wore red clothing to represent “stop.”

Pia Blum is a Drywood landowner and is worried about how the project will impact the landscape.

“It devalues our land and this is the most beautiful land in all of Alberta. I cannot understand why they put it in this corridor where the prairies meet the mountains and you can’t find that anywhere else,” she says.

Meanwhile, Tim Romanow owns land east of Cardston and is concerned about soaring power bills.

“There’s potential for some extremely high cost overruns that are going to cost everybody in the province. Not just the landowners directly impacted but every Albertan and people need to hear that message and understand the potential impact this project has on our area,” he adds.

Mark Johns with AltaLink asked residents to keep in mind a firm route hasn’t been established.

He says additional options are still being explored and they’re taking all feedback into consideration.

“We try to find the route with the least impact. We look at the various aspects as we do that. We look at impact to residents, visual impacts, agricultural impacts, environmental impacts, costs and technical aspects,” he adds.

AltaLink will hold another open house at Twin Butte’s town hall July 18.

© Global News. A division of Shaw Media Inc., 2012.

By Paula Simons, edmontonjournal.com July 11, 2012

EDMONTON – Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

It’s an adage I keep in mind, when conspiracy theories beckon.

It’s easy to understand why many politicians, consumer advocates, and other people are suspicious about Monday’s extraordinary rolling blackouts, triggered when five major power plants went off-line during the heat wave, sending power prices skyrocketing to the maximum ceiling price, $1,000 per megawatt-hour. That several plants would shut down at a time of peak demand does seem fishy, especially when AESO, the Alberta Electrical System Operator, refuses to reveal why they failed. Gaming the system isn’t new: six months ago, TransAlta, one of the province’s biggest generators, was fined $370,000 for creating an artificial energy shortage and inflating electricity prices, for which TransAlta benefited to the tune of $5.5 million.

But Monday’s mess had less to do with collusion than with structural weaknesses in our electrical system.

Records provided Wednesday by AESO and Capital Power, show power prices began to sharply climb because of record temperatures and record power use, well before three of the power plants in question broke down.

The price was already at $597.53 MWh at noon before Atco’s 385 MW Battle River 5 generator failed just after 1 p.m.

The price hit $999.99 before Capital Power’s 400 MW Genesee 2 plant went down.

Far from profiteering, it looks as if power producers actually blew an opportunity to cash in on our insatiable demand for air conditioning.

Who were the real conspirators driving up prices? Perhaps we were.

Martin Kennedy, Capital Power’s vice-president of external relations, says their plant failed because of a malfunctioning heat sensor, which threw the plant into automatic shutdown.

“We had absolutely no financial incentive for that unit to go down. The maximum price had already been reached.”

On top of that, he says, Capital Power must now pay contractual penalties to its clients for failing to produce the power promised to them.

Richard Dixon, executive director of the Centre for Applied Business Research in Energy and the Environment at the University of Alberta, also laughs off talk of conspiracy, especially because Alberta’s electricity market isn’t a regulated monopoly, but a competitive enterprise.

“The way to look at it from an economist’s point of view is to see if they were capturing maximum profit. You’re not benefiting from the fact you went off-line. Who’s going to make money? The guy down the road. Economically, that doesn’t make sense.”

Dixon’s research into Monday’s blackouts suggests at least three plants failed because of problems with their heat sensors, which reacted to the hot weather.

Wind power also failed dramatically. At peak, wind adds 939 MW to our electrical supply Monday, the air was so calm, there were 6 MW of wind power available.

Just because there was no nefarious scheme to drive up prices doesn’t mean there aren’t problems. When electricity was a regulated utility, companies could overbuild to create excess generation capacity to be fired up in the event of a crisis. They were guaranteed a rate of return, and in exchange, promised supply stability.

Now, in a free market system, where private companies assume all risk, there’s no incentive to build anything that isn’t practically profitable. That makes the system less elastic and could lead us into occasional darkness.

According to an AESO report published this May, by 2013 Alberta’s electric system daily supply cushion — its ability to meet peak demand — won’t be adequate to handle power usage spikes. For the period between May 1, 2012 to April 30, 2014, the supply shortfall was estimated to be 686 MWh. Some pressure will be reduced when Enmax’s major new 800 MW gas power plant opens in 2015. Until then, however, there may be more days when Alberta’s system strains to meet demand.

Dixon thinks it’s time we stopped gorging on electricity and started thinking about conservation.

“We haven’t had a serious demand-side discussion in this province for years. If you want your air conditioning on, maybe you have to turn your lights off.”

Monday, it was 33 C, not 43 C; still, our electricity use spiked at 9885 MW. That’s 333 MW more than we used at our peak last July — almost a power plant’s worth of juice.

If our free market model, growing reliance on wind, and growing energy appetite mean we won’t have enough electricity on demand to cushion us through a supply crisis, maybe it’s time to have a serious conversation about just how much how much we’re demanding.

[email protected]

Twitter.com/Paulatics

Facebook.com/EJPaulaSimons

To read Paula’s blog, go to edmontonjournal.com/Paulatics

Blackout timeline

8 a.m. — Electrical system demand in Alberta is 8589 MW. The price per $14.29 per megawatt hour. The temperature is 24 degrees Celsius

8:34 a.m. — ATCO Power’s coal-fired Battle River Plant 5, with a capacity of 385 MW, goes off-line.

10 a.m. — The temperature climbs to 28 degrees C. Electricity use climbs to 9355 MW. The price rises to $125.64 per MWh.

11 a.m. — Electricity use hits 9589 MW, a new summertime record for Alberta. The price hits $502.59.

1 p.m. — Electricity use climbs to 9842 MW. The price hits $899.52.

1:06 p.m. — TransAlta’s Keephills 1 power plant, with 406 MW generation capacity goes off-line.

1:08 p.m. — The price of electricity hits $999.99 per MWh

1:37 p.m.  — AESO, the Alberta Electrical Systems Operator, issues a Level 1 alert.

2 p.m. — The temperature climbs to 32 degrees C. Electricity use climbs to 9885 MW, a record. The price stays at $999.99 per MWh

2:06 p.m. — AESO declares a Level 2 electricity alert.

2:07 p.m. — A heat sensor malfunctions at Capital Power’s Genesee 2 plant, with a capacity of 400 MW.

2:10 p.m. — AESO declares a Level 3 alert, orders major distributors including Enmax and Epcor, to shed electricity load. The price hits the maximum $1000.00 MWh

2:58 p.m. — TransAlta’s 362 megawatt Sundance 3 generator, which had been off-line for servicing since Friday, comes back into service.

3 p.m. — The temperature hits 32 degrees. Thanks to rolling blackouts, electricity use drops slightly to 9654 MW. Price remains at $1000 per MWh

3:46 p.m. — ATCO Power’s 385 MW Joffre natural gas power plant goes off-line.

4 p.m. — The temperature is 33 degrees C. Electricity use declines to 9573 MW. Price remains at $1000.

5 p.m. — AESO reduces alert status to level two. Power use rises to 9606 MW. The price stays at $1000.

5:13 p.m. — ATCO’s Joffre plant comes back on line.

5:14 p.m. — Capital Power’s Genesee 2 back on line

5:41 p.m. — AESO reduces power alert status to level 1

11 p.m. — The price of electricity falls sharply to $19.74 MWh. Demand levels to 8936 MW.

© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal

By Don Butler, Postmedia News July 10, 2012

OTTAWA — Wind power opponents were celebrating Tuesday after Health Canada announced it will conduct peer-reviewed research, in collaboration with Statistics Canada, into the effect of wind turbine noise on human health.

Jane Wilson, president of the anti-wind group Wind Concerns Ontario, learned of the study in a phone call Tuesday morning from Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s office.

“Wow, I said, is it Christmas? It’s July!” she said in an interview. “This is exactly what we’ve been saying all along, that there really wasn’t the science there to base policy on.”

Wilson is confident the study will confirm the link between wind turbines and human health. “The symptoms that are being reported by people in Ontario are the same as those being reported around the world,” she said. “So there really is something there.”

But the wind industry had a much different response.

“We believe that the balance of scientific evidence clearly shows that wind turbines don’t have an impact on human health,” said Robert Hornung, president of the Canadian Wind Energy Association. “That’s been supported by numerous reviews of the scientific literature.”

While Hornung didn’t want to prejudge the results of Health Canada’s study, he noted that research in this area is ongoing. “As that research has been added to the knowledge base, it hasn’t, to this point, led to any fundamental change in the conclusion.”

Health Canada’s announcement immediately led to calls for a moratorium on new wind power developments pending the completion of the study, expected in 2014.

“It is unacceptable for the Ontario government to continue to approve projects when government staff refuse to acknowledge the problem, are not able to measure the noise, and cannot ensure compliance with their own regulations,” Wilson said.

Nepean-Carleton MP Pierre Poilievre issued an open letter to Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, calling for a moratorium on the Marlborough Wind Farm, a proposed 10-turbine development near North Gower, Ont., about 40 kilometres south of Ottawa.

The project, which has stirred strong local opposition, is on hold awaiting release of Ontario’s revised Feed-in Tariff program, expected later this summer.

The question of whether wind turbines harm the health of those who live near them has been highly contentious. Opponents say low-frequency sound emitted by the turbines makes some people dizzy, causes headaches, and disrupts sleep.

“Some people are unable to work,” said Wilson, who lives in North Gower. “Over time, that gets worse, and they’re not able to stay in their homes.”

In Ontario alone, Poilievre said, more than 130 people — living an average of 675 metres from a wind turbine — have reported adverse health effects due to turbine noise.

Warren Mabee, director of Queen’s University’s Institute for Energy and Environmental Policy, said the consensus worldwide is that “there may be people who are sensitive to the noise, but it’s not consistent across the whole population.

“There’s also an emerging consensus that there’s a pretty strong mental component to this,” he added. “There’s people that have homes that are very close to some of these projects, and it is stressful for them. There may be people that are suffering, and we shouldn’t dismiss those claims.”

Mabee said it was responsible of the federal government to commission the study. “It’s always good to have more information.”

But, he added, “I don’t expect any big surprises in this report, because it’s been very, very difficult in the past to link conclusively cause and effect, to show that the turbines themselves are solely responsible for any kind of health impacts people are experiencing.”

Wind power projects have been proliferating in recent years, spurred by generous government subsidies. As of May 2012, Canada’s installed capacity was 5.4 gigawatts, a nearly seven-fold increase since 2005.

Wind power now supplies 2.3 per cent of Canada’s electricity demands, and the industry hopes to ramp that up to 20 per cent by 2025.

Unlike some past studies, which have simply reviewed other literature, Health Canada’s will be a field study, conducted at 2,000 dwellings ranging from 500 metres to more than five kilometres from wind power plants with eight to 12 turbines.

It will involve interviews with residents, automated blood pressure measurement, sleep evaluations and measurement of cortisol levels, a marker for stress. All the data will be correlated with calculations of wind turbine noise so any potential relationship to health symptoms can be reliably determined.

While Hornung wouldn’t speculate on the impact of a negative finding on Canada’s burgeoning wind power industry, he said his association will review the study’s proposed methodology and monitor the results.

Mabee said Ontario’s wind power expansion has been very much led by industry, with projects going wherever wind developers can line up willing landowners with access to hydro lines.

“Often that is where there’s a lot of people living,” he said. “And that’s a bit of an issue. Maybe we need to think about that more in the future. Is there a way that we can cluster them away from large populations?”

The decision to proceed with the study follows the collapse of efforts by a working group from all levels of government to draft national guidelines to mitigate the potential health impacts of turbines on nearby residents. That project was cancelled earlier this year when working group participants were unable to reach a consensus.

[email protected]

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Original source article: Health Canada to probe possible health effects of wind turbines

By Judith Lavoie, Times Colonist July 11, 2012 6:37 AM

A damning report on Enbridge Inc.’s inept handling of the 2010 crude oil spill in Michigan should kill the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline, NDP leader Thomas Mulcair said Tuesday in Victoria.

“Northern Gateway should be stopped and the plug should be pulled on it,” said Mulcair, after meeting with local community groups and business leaders.

“Today’s conclusive report by the Americans, I think, should be the final nail in that coffin.”

The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board said Tuesday that Enbridge managed the massive Michigan spill like the “Keystone Kops.”

The company did not act for 17 hours after receiving the initial alarm about the pipeline rupture and failed to take action even though it had known since 2004 that the pipeline suffered from corrosion, the board found.

The Northern Gateway pipeline, which is facing strong opposition from First Nations and many British Columbians, would run from Alberta’s oil sands to Kitimat, where bitumen would be loaded on to supertankers and shipped to Asian markets.

“The concerns being expressed in B.C., now have to be listened to by everyone,” Mulcair said.

“I am firmly opposed to Northern Gateway, as is the NDP. It makes no ecological or economic sense to be taking those huge risks with that very delicate coastline.”

The New Democrat leader was in Victoria at the University of Victoria for a fundraiser to pay off expenses from his leadership campaign.

He previously aroused the ire of Albertans by saying the oilsands are driving up the dollar and hurting the manufacturing sectors of central Canada and calling for greener development and massive cleanup efforts.

On Tuesday, Mulcair also lashed out at the Conservative government’s dismantling of environmental protections and said actions such as gutting the Fisheries Act are turning many Canadians to the NDP.

“Canadians want us to protect the environment. They believe in basic principles like polluter-pay,” he said.

Changes to the Fisheries Act would have devastating effects on B.C.’s lakes, as the new rules require the presence of a commercial fishery before waters are protected, Mulcair said.

“It is not enough to show a deleterious substance has been put into fish habitat, now you have to be able to prove that, not only were the fish negatively affected, but they’re actually going to die,” he said.

Polls favourable to the NDP show that Canadians want an alternative to the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the NDP is providing it, Mulcair said.

Mulcair shrugged off a Conservative attack ad campaign and said, although the NDP is upbeat and wants to take the high road, the party will respond in a similar vein if that is what it takes to show Canadians what is wrong with the Conservative government.

“I learned my politics in a very tough neighbourhood in Quebec City, and I am kind of used to the rough and tumble,” he said.

New NDP ads, posted on the party’s website, go after Harper’s economic record and feature ominous drumbeats and unflattering black and white photos.

The ads were emailed to party supporters Tuesday and posted on the NDP website, but it is not yet clear whether the party will pay to broadcast them.

[email protected]

— With a file from the Canadian Press

Read more stores from the Times Colonist.

© Copyright (c) The Victoria Times Colonist

By Keith Gerein and Sheila Pratt, edmontonjournal.com July 10, 2012

EDMONTON – Alberta’s electric system watchdog is planning a full review of Monday’s power shortage in which the unexpected failure of six generating stations on one of the hottest days of the year led to rotating blackouts across much of the province.

Harry Chandler, head of Alberta’s Market System Administrator, said Tuesday his probe will try to “pick apart the day,” by looking into the legitimacy of the plant shutdowns and whether all market rules were followed. Critics have said the failure of so many major generators on a day of record electricity demand is suspicious, raising the question of whether market manipulation was at play to drive up the price of power.

“Those are legitimate questions, people should be asking those questions and it’s up to us to respond to that,” Chandler said. “Like everybody else, we noticed this one. We’re looking at it, but I wouldn’t take it any further than that at this point.”

Consumer groups are calling for new rules to help prevent electricity brownouts.

Under the current system, power companies must signal a day ahead the amount of energy they will supply and at what price. But neither the price nor the amount of power is binding.

Under a binding, day-ahead market mechanism, generators would pay a penalty if they did not meet their supply offer or they would have to buy power to meet their pledge, said Jim Wachowich, lawyer for the Alberta Consumers’ Association.

The potential of paying a penalty would reduce the risk of sudden power shortages like the one that occurred Monday that briefly sent prices soaring to the maximum rate of $1,000 per kilowatt hour.

“In this market, what is the penalty to the generator who does not show up?” Wachowich asked.

“In Alberta’s market, there is incentive for generators to pull out and the price goes up, but if they had to pay a penalty, they would be less likely to pull out.”

While the electricity industry has said the shutdowns were the result of an unfortunate series of mechanical mishaps, some critics have asked how the public can know for sure.

Last December, Calgary-based TransAlta Corp. was fined $370,000 for manipulating the market in November 2010. TransAlta created an artificial power shortage, causing consumers to pay an extra $5. 5 million on their bills.

Sheldon Fulton, formerly executive director of the Industrial Power Consumers Association, said the big generators are resistant to a binding day-ahead market because it shifts some risk to them and prevents them from pushing up the price.

“It’s similar to a situation if you order a fridge from Costco at one price and next day, when it is delivered, you are told the price just went up. What kind of market is that?”

Doug Simpson, director of market operations for the Alberta Electric System Operator, said a binding, day-ahead market has been contemplated twice, but the provincial government preferred the current setup. He said while the current system does not hold power companies to prearranged prices and volumes, such companies are required to at all times offer all the energy that’s available from their plants.