Controversial wind project gets green light (Grouse Mountain)

[SpongeG]

Controversial wind project gets green light


A controversial wind turbine project on the peak of North Vancouver's Grouse Mountain has been given the green light.

North Vancouver District council voted Monday 4-3 in favor to issue a permit to Grouse Resorts to build a 65 metre-high single wind turbine.

The tower will be visible from much of the North Shore and several parts of the Lower Mainland.

The resort hopes to have the turbine up and running in time for the 2010 Winter Games - to demonstrate the green-energy initiative.

When completed, the 21-storey structure will provide 20 per cent of the electricity demand for the resort - enough to power 400 homes.

Since its initial conception three years ago, citizens and North Shore councillors alike have worried about the impact of the development - and the aesthetics of installing a huge windmill in the middle of a mountain skyline.

Others, including Councillor Janice Harris, are concerned about noise and environment pollution.

The turbine, which will be next to the Heaven's Sake ski run, is slated for completion in November 2009.

http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/l...shColumbiaHome



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please Add Comments(2)

environment first,
citizens are worried about the aesthetics of a windmill... how about the aesthetics of a clear cut strip for power lines, or a proposed waste to energy plant in port moody? as someone who is actually going to be alive 50 years from now (hopefully!) i look forward to seeing the positive environmental impact this windmill will have on my future, and possibly my children future. this is something Canadians need to vote for, the economy will rebound eventually and the future will be sound financially once again, but the environment and our future as young adults and children WONT rebound. we need to act NOW.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Katherine
Aesthetics will not be compromised as much as building homes on the side of the cliffs and mountainsides all over the North Shore and it would be a highly visible symbol that we are truly attempting to resolve the energy crisis in an eco friendly way.

[Yume-sama]

The do-gooders: "Save the planet! Lower carbon emissions!"
The company: "Ok! Sure thing we'll build a big Wind Turbine right here."
The do-gooders: "Yay! Down with George Bush! Hey... uhh, wait, you're not gonna put it anywhere we can SEE it will you? Yeah, that would be an eyesore from our big carbon emitting houses..."

I love the World in which we live.

[mr.x]

From the CTV news report, it'll be quite noticeable from Vancouver.



Interesting article:

Wind turbines cause health problems, residents say

Updated: Sun Oct. 05 2008 19:23:32
CTV.ca News Staff

Windmills may be an environmentally friendly alternative energy source but they also cause debilitating health problems, say people who live near them.

Wind turbines are popping up in rural communities around the world, including Canada, in the hope that they will reduce reliance on coal and other sources for power. Currently, there are about 1,500 turbines across Canada and there are plans to build another 1,000 to 1,500 in the next year.

But some residents who live near wind farms complain the turbines cause a number of adverse health effects, such as crippling headaches, nose bleeds and a constant ringing in the ears.

Helen and Bill Fraser initially supported the nearby wind farm in Melancthon, Ont. One turbine sat close to the Fraser's kitchen window.

"We thought, more green energy, this is great," Helen told CTV News.

However, Helen says she developed headaches, body aches and she had trouble sleeping. The dog began wetting the floor at night.

"There were nights I was lying in bed and my heart would beat to the pulse of the turbine. It was an uneasy feeling," Helen said.

Ernie Marshall at first supported the wind farm that was placed near his home near Goderich, Ont. However, he also says that once the turbines got rolling, his health began to suffer.

"I had problems with my heart, with my eyes, my digestive system," Marshall told CTV News. "It traumatizes your whole body."

Dr. Nina Pierpont, a pediatrician in upstate New York, has interviewed dozens of people who live near windmills in Canada, the United States and Europe.

Her soon-to-be released book, Wind Turbine Syndrome, documents the litany of health problems experienced by some people who have wind farms near their homes.

Pierpont believes that with the growth of wind farms near residential areas, Wind Turbine Syndrome "likely will become an industrial plague," she states on her website.

Scientists have only begun studying the phenomenon in the last few years.

Some early findings suggest that wind turbines create a high intensity, low frequency sound that may have an effect on the body. Not only can the sound potentially cause debilitating illness. Some researchers believe that the vibrations the sound causes in the inner ear may lead to vibro-acoustic disease, which can cause dizziness, nausea and sleep disturbances.

However, officials with the Canadian Wind Energy Association point to a handful of studies they say prove that windmills lead to few, if any, adverse health effects.

"We know there have been complaints about health impacts of wind turbines," Sean Whittaker of the Canadian Wind Energy Association told CTV News.

"On the other hand, we know there are some 10,000 turbines installed across North America and complaints have been relatively few. There's been research done on this and to date that research has come to a fairly solid conclusion that wind turbines do not have an adverse impact on human health."

Whittaker says the windmill industry follows all regulations for where and how a wind farm can be established.

"It's important to point out that in order to install a wind farm, there is a very lengthy procedure to go through of environmental assessments, approvals, permits, regulatory approval," Whittaker said. "And those are skewed around making sure the turbines don't have an effect on people, on plants, animals, birds."

The issue has not just put experts at odds. Communities across North America are divided between residents who say local windmills have made them sick and their neighbours who don't believe them.

"Everyone was calling me a liar," Ernie Marshall said. "It don't matter who you talk to. You bring 'em out here and they'll say that noise don't bother us. Sit there for a week under that and listen to it and see what it does to your body."

The inconsistencies in the early research, coupled with the fact that some residents who live near wind turbines complain of such a wide array of symptoms, are evidence that further study is needed to determine if Wind Turbine Syndrome is a problem, how big of one and what should be done, experts say.

"Depending on your distance you'll have 30, 40, 50 per cent of people who are troubled, but not 100 per cent," Dr. Robert McMurtry of the University of Western Ontario told CTV News. "That's why it's important to do these studies to see just how many are troubled and how real it is."

More research will also help governments determine a standard distance that windmills should be located from homes and schools.

For now, provincial governments are setting their own guidelines, which call for windmills to sit about 400 metres from buildings.

Some groups, including the National Academy of Medicine in France, suggest larger setbacks between 1.5 and two kilometres away from homes and schools.

Some affected residents can only sell their homes and move away. The Frasers left their home of 32 years and moved to nearby Shelburne, Ont. They say their symptoms have, for the most part, vanished.

Ernie Marshall moved to the town of Seaforth, Ont., which is several kilometres away from the turbines near his former home.

"I had to get out or I wouldn't be standing here talking to you," Marshall said.

[Yume-sama]

Oh jesus. Let's just get it over with and build a huge nuclear plant then. All of the other alternative energy sources are always shot down as soon as they are offered, once begged for.

[mr.x]

I'm not sure where exactly this turbine is, i just hope it doesn't affect the animals living in the mountain, including the bears and wolves, as well as birds.



from canada.com:

COMMENTS ON THIS STORY
Add Your Comment
B . A . T . Man
Tue, Oct 7, 08 at 10:39 AM
But what about my little buddies ?! More carnage just like Dawson Creek ?! I give up ! May the evil villains of Gotham invade your neighbourhood ! You're on your own !!!!!!!!
Shawn
Tue, Oct 7, 08 at 11:54 AM
Yep, typical politics, and 'green lovers'. Somebody wants to go green, save the planet and because it wasn't a political decision, it's no good. Yes, a few birds may and probably will be hurt, but they have senses, and will 'see' movement and probably steer clear. It's not like the mill will suddenly slow down, or speed up, it will basically be on a regular speed. Grow up, either preach green, and do it, or shut up and lets others that do care proceed!!!
B. Logan
Tue, Oct 7, 08 at 12:32 PM
I use wind power, and have for about ten years. In Baja Mexico. I live on a flyway and bats are our friends, as they help keep bugs at bay. The blade tips emit high frequency sound that birds and bats acute hearing picks up on and they evade the area, I have never found a carcass or seen a bird fly near the blades. however they will roost on both the body and blades when stationary.
john galt
Tue, Oct 7, 08 at 12:51 PM
I swear, the day somebody solves all the world's problems with an invention, an enviromentalist will complain about its color!
Brian in beautiful P.R.
Tue, Oct 7, 08 at 01:13 PM
Maybe Councillor Harris can round-up a whole bunch of wildlife, get them all to jump on a wheel and get it going real fast to turn a generator. Hey, no animals killed and no noise!! What a concept!! Get over it you bleedin heart city folk!!! Those windmills can sure be noisy!!!!
RIGHT.
Tue, Oct 7, 08 at 01:22 PM
I think they would be better off building a HUGE Ferris Wheel.
CIRCUS CHIMP
Tue, Oct 7, 08 at 01:24 PM
SHAWN: You are incorrect in your assessment. The bats will die because of the drop in atmospheric pressure created near the turbine thus making their little bat lungs explode. I hope youre happy.
Will
Tue, Oct 7, 08 at 01:54 PM
Well said John Galt!!!
K. WALTON
Tue, Oct 7, 08 at 03:07 PM
As a resident and business onwner on the North Shore, I am disapointed that this did not recieve better advertised public input. I only heard about this on Sunday AFTER the one and only public input session. I am generally in support of green power, however; I am worried that one wind turbine could turn into a massive wind farm. Once one is up and running and people forget about it Grouse could easily get that passed especially since this one seemed to get ramroded through easily. Obviously the owner of Grouse Mountain Resorts has a LOT of pull with the District!
B. Elliott
Tue, Oct 7, 08 at 03:20 PM
I'd like to know why when you Google this project there are no public accesible project plans or maps? There is nothing on thier web site to indicate what they are planning, short or long term. Does Grouse not want to advertise this project? Do they not want public input? Do they not care? or are they avoiding too much publicity?

[Yume-sama]

I do have a feeling it is mostly symbolic than actually practical (as are a lot of things). A huge ferris wheel would be cooler And it could probably generate it's own power, too!

[mr.x]

North Vancouver council OKs huge wind turbine on Grouse
Large tower will be visible from all over region

Andy Ivens, The Province
Published: Tuesday, October 07, 2008

A controversial wind turbine 65 metres high near the peak of Grouse Mountain that would be visible for miles took one step closer to reality last night.

A passionate debate on the pros and cons of the big windmill ended with North Vancouver District council voting 4-3 to issue a permit to Grouse Mountain Resorts to build the turbine.

A spokesman for the resort noted time was running out in the construction window to have the turbine up and running in time for the 2010 Winter Olympics, to demonstrate the green-energy initiative.

When completed, the turbine will provide 20 per cent of the resort\'s electricity needs -- enough to power 400 homes.

Some councillors were worried about the threat to wildlife and the esthetics of installing the huge white windmill in the middle of a mountain skyline.

Coun. Mike Little predicted people will get used to the sight of the huge blades spinning.

\"I think people will see the windmill on the hill for about two weeks and then it\'ll just disappear into the horizon,\" said Little, who voted in favour.

Coun. Janice Harris was the strongest voice opposed.

\"The main issues are the environment and noise pollution,\" said Harris.

\"There is likely to be some bird and bat deaths,\" she said.

\"It\'s an issue for soaring and migratory birds and it\'s a clear and present danger to bats,\" said Harris, who criticized the turbine as \"another tourist attraction\" for Grouse Mountain Resorts.

\"It\'s simply a net loss to the environment,\" she said.

Coun. Lisa Muri put forward a motion to defer the decision until more public input had been received, but it failed.

\"This is [an issue of] green energy versus protecting wildlife,\" she said.

But Mayor Richard Walton, an environmentalist, said: \"We have to take some risk and we have to take some leadership,\" and led the vote in favour of issuing the permit.

[mr.x]

is it any coincidence that there are windmills in the 2010 branding? (when there are currently none in the city)

[fever]

It's going right on top of Grouse, at the top of the peak chair (if that's still there, it's been a couple years) on the run that goes around the back a little bit.

This thing clearly doesn't fit within the zoning and it's proposed within only four kilometres of the nearest residence. It's good to see the councillor's talking about noise as the most immediate concern, but she's clearly dropped the ball on traffic and parking. She's leaving the door open to someone with better NIMBY reflexes in the upcoming municipal election.

[phesto]

^Lol. When I realized this was under the DNV's jurisdiction I was skeptical of their approval, so I checked out the report that went to council last night (including renderings of the tower and views from the City).

Doesn't seem like it'll be that bad aesthetically. http://www.dnv.org/upload/documents/...ts/1077329.pdf

Of note:

The tower will be 341 ft to the top of the blade.

It will have a viewing platform 190 ft high to accommodate approx. 24 people.

The turbine will generate 1.5 MW, or about 20-25% of Grouse Mountain's electrical needs.

The max noise level will be at the base of the turbine and will be about 54 dB (A) or about the sound of a car driving through a residential neigbourhood.
--------------------------------

Had to laugh at the "clear and present danger to bats" comment. Her opposition to the project is clearly just an attempt at drumming up support with bat lovers for the upcoming election.

[Yume-sama]

Are there many bats on top of Grouse Mountain? >.>

[excel]

thanks for the news.

[Metro-One]

First - I think having a ski resort on a mountain disturbs much of the fauna already (more than a wind turbine alone would).

Second - This is a classic case of people in Vancouver once again trying to put esthetics before functionality.

Third - Every action in this world has some negative consequences, but this here is the lesser of two evils. Building a coal fired plant is more of an eye sore and health hazard than a wind turbine i believe for an example.

The nay sayers are the same people who call dense tower neighborhoods eyesores but dont seem to realize that sprawled single detached housing neighborhoods spread across a mountain side are more of an eyesore.

[Smooth]

Originally Posted by fever

This thing clearly doesn't fit within the zoning and it's proposed within only four kilometres of the nearest residence. It's good to see the councillor's talking about noise as the most immediate concern, but she's clearly dropped the ball on traffic and parking. She's leaving the door open to someone with better NIMBY reflexes in the upcoming municipal election.

Haha. I'm not sure if people caught the sarcasm in that post. I think North Shore residents don't have anything to worry about because they're too close to the mountain to see it. It's the rest of Vancouver that will have a good view of it. This whole story reminds me of the cries of outrage over the North Shore Automall sign back in the day. Articles were written about how it would ruin views and be an eyesore. People don't even notice it anymore.

I'm surprised that there's talk of having a viewing platform on it. When you're a kilometer above the city going up an extra 190ft won't make a noticeable difference to your view.

[Distill3d]

i'm in favor of it. in fact, put 5 more up there to create 120% of the power needed. who cares if you can see the damn things, i think they look awesome!!

[Hourglass]

Well, shoot, then, they should also get rid of the Burrard Thermal Plant in Port Moody. That's a huge eyesore that can be seen across the inlet from Burnaby. And that oil refinery in Burnaby above Barnet Highway. That looks terrible. I mean, this whole electricity thing is so overrated anyway...

[sacrifice333]

Originally Posted by Distill3d

i'm in favor of it. in fact, put 5 more up there to create 120% of the power needed. who cares if you can see the damn things, i think they look awesome!!

This is a great project and would bet money that within 10 years they'll have enough of them up there to put power back into the grid.

I would also expect Cypress Mountain to follow suit, if they can. [Maybe not possible since they are on Provincial Park land?]

Whistler/Blackcomb will probably also do something like this now that the long-term vision of Peak2Peak is basically reality.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

The do-gooders: "Save the planet! Lower carbon emissions!"
The company: "Ok! Sure thing we'll build a big Wind Turbine right here."
The do-gooders: "Yay! Down with George Bush! Hey... uhh, wait, you're not gonna put it anywhere we can SEE it will you? Yeah, that would be an eyesore from our big carbon emitting houses..."

What makes you think these "do-gooders" calling for and denouncing the turbines are one in the same? That's a rather large oversimplification of the kind of people that choose to act/think in progressive ways.

[eduardo88]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Oh jesus. Let's just get it over with and build a huge nuclear plant then. All of the other alternative energy sources are always shot down as soon as they are offered, once begged for.

Why are people so against nuclear? It's probably the only viable clean energy source with the potential to actually reduce our carbon foot print. Not only is it clean, but its completely safe and efficient.

Theres only one word to classify anti-nuclear activists: morons.

[geoff's two cents]

There are two very legitimate reasons I can think of why people might be anti-nuclear:

1) There's the issue of nuclear waste - Nobody knows what to do with it even now. It has to be sealed in steel containers and is for the most part stored deep underground. What will the long-term consequences of this mode of action be? Nobody knows. . . Unless you, eduardo88, do. In which case please enlighten us, the world. We're waiting. . .

2) There's the issue of what happens when something goes wrong. Chernobyl is the only large-scale nuclear power disaster I'm aware of, but it's perfectly plausible that an increased appetite for nuclear power, coupled with the fact that there would be human beings in charge of it, could mean another incident of similar magnitude.

I think wind, and especially solar, power, are largely untapped sources of - for the most part - green electricity. However, I think the long-term 'solution', if there is one, will ultimately be for people to significantly reduce the amount of energy they use - which means limiting the frequency of high-energy activities such as long-distance commuting, the heating or cooling large homes, the consumption of products that require hefty amounts of energy in their manufacture, etc.

I agree with Metro-One - Barren ski slopes are so good for animals, aren't they? Were people really thinking of the birds and bats when they clear-cut a strip down Grouse Mountain? If sticking a windmill in the middle of an area nowhere close to anybody's house, and with - locally speaking - limited ecological value, helps keep the city from getting electricity from burning garbage, I'm all for it.

Given that nobody actually lives near the windmill, and that opposition to the project stems largely from them having to look at it from a distance, opponents of this wind project are, it seems to me, guilty of NIMBYism in the worst possible way.

I also agree that the people who choose to live in single family dwellings higher up on the mountainside are infinitely more guilty of ruining views than proponents of wind energy. If anything, it's the continuing ecological threat posed by that type of lifestyle that warrants the search for less invasive modes of electricity production.

The article above also cites examples from southwestern Ontario, where the windmills are quite densely situated - I drove through Goderich and area recently. A lone windmill on the top of a mountain nowhere close to anybody's house will not have the same adverse effects on human health.