Ontario Canada's Liberal Government Gives Up On Wind Farms After Big Loss To Taxpayers

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Phil

unread,
Feb 12, 2011, 7:50:25 PM2/12/11
to
Now Ontarians can stop laughing at Barack Hussein Obama and his Don
Quixoti windmills and cap-and-trade
energy intervention in the U.S. economy as they are being financially
damaged also.

"Ontario taxpayers will now be on the hook for years paying for
Ontario's failed experiment with wind energy", say
the Opposition Conservatives. This is [Liberal Premier] Dalton
McGuinty's latest backtrack on his failed expensive energy
experiments". Ontario consumers' electricity bills are already sky-
high but headed much higher. These idiot liberal interventionist
politicians we have elected, like Dalton McGuinty, Barack Obama and Al
Gore (a former unsuccessful Democrat candidate in the U.S. should be
taken out to the woodshed and whipped--hard.

Ontarians can fortunated send McGuinty and socialists packing in a
fall election, but American's must wait another
two years before sending "the anointed one" packing.

Chom Noamsky

unread,
Feb 13, 2011, 12:58:30 AM2/13/11
to

That just proves Canada isn't capable of developing new technologies and
making them profitable. Denmark created a profitable wind power
industry, one that employs 20,000 people and brings the economy 3
billion euros. Plus it provides about 25% of their total generation
capacity. They pay a bit more for power but at least they are getting
away from dirty coal and oil and nuclear energy that produces wastes
that will still be toxic 100,000 years after we're all dead.

The politics of oil is one of the most destructive forces on the planet.

Kennewick Man; the first, the BEST!

unread,
Feb 13, 2011, 1:27:32 AM2/13/11
to


In 1998, Norway commissioned a study of wind power in Denmark and
concluded that it has "serious environmental effects, insufficient
production, and high production costs."

Denmark (population 5.3 million) has over 6,000 turbines that produced
electricity equal to 19% of what the country used in 2002. Yet no
conventional power plant has been shut down. Because of the
intermittency and variability of the wind, conventional power plants
must be kept running at full capacity to meet the actual demand for
electricity. Most cannot simply be turned on and off as the wind dies
and rises, and the quick ramping up and down of those that can be
would actually increase their output of pollution and carbon dioxide
(the primary "greenhouse" gas). So when the wind is blowing just right
for the turbines, the power they generate is usually a surplus and
sold to other countries at an extremely discounted price, or the
turbines are simply shut off.

Chom Noamsky

unread,
Feb 13, 2011, 2:03:30 AM2/13/11
to

And what criticisms can you find about coal, oil and nuclear energy? I
can find lots, in fact if I started reading now I might just get through
all the material in about 147 years. There are flaws and economic issues
with every new technology, eventually the bugs get worked out and human
ingenuity wins in the end. The economies that can't get away from the
fossil fuel tit are simply admitting they aren't smart enough to develop
new energy technologies and make them profitable.

It won't be all that long before wind, solar and tidal will be more
competitive than fossil. The price of fossil fuels will only go up in
the future as the demand for it climbs and the supply gets scarcer. The
economies that are getting away from fossil will feel some pain today
but tomorrow they will soar. It's an inevitability that will come
sooner or later.

Gary McClennan

unread,
Feb 13, 2011, 11:38:40 AM2/13/11
to
On Feb 12, 7:50 pm, Phil <clayno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Now Ontarians can stop laughing at Barack Hussein Obama and his Don
> Quixoti windmills and cap-and-trade
> energy intervention in the U.S. economy as they are being financially
> damaged also.


Your opinion is worthless because it's uninformed and partisan.
Equating wind farms with socialism is the view point of a radical
right wing nut case. In addition, Ontario is in the process of
greatly enhancing the green hydro electric capacity of Niagara Falls
and has converted several coal-fired stations to natural gas, while
oil rich Conservative Alberta leads Canada in the largest number of
wind farms and electricity generated. They have no nuclear power
stations.

http://www.canwea.ca/farms/wind-farms_e.php


Phil

unread,
Feb 13, 2011, 11:48:31 AM2/13/11
to
***
That's because you are mentally retarded and a very slow reader. In
fact, your reading comprehension is that of a moron.

There are flaws and economic issues
> with every new technology, eventually the bugs get worked out and human
> ingenuity wins in the end.  The economies that can't get away from the
> fossil fuel tit are simply admitting they aren't smart enough to develop
> new energy technologies and make them profitable.
>
> It won't be all that long before wind, solar and tidal will be more
> competitive than fossil.  The price of fossil fuels will only go up in
> the future as the demand for it climbs and the supply gets scarcer.  The
> economies that are getting away from fossil will feel some pain today
> but tomorrow they will soar.  It's an inevitability that will come

> sooner or later.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Phil

unread,
Feb 13, 2011, 11:51:40 AM2/13/11
to
On Feb 13, 12:58 am, Chom Noamsky <blahb...@blahblahblah.com> wrote:
> On 2/12/2011 4:50 PM, Phil wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Now Ontarians can stop laughing at Barack Hussein Obama and his Don
> > Quixoti windmills and cap-and-trade
> > energy intervention in the U.S. economy as they are being financially
> > damaged also.
>
> > "Ontario taxpayers will  now be on the hook for years paying for
> > Ontario's failed experiment with wind energy", say
> > the Opposition Conservatives. This is [Liberal Premier] Dalton
> > McGuinty's latest backtrack on his failed expensive energy
> > experiments". Ontario consumers' electricity bills are already sky-
> > high but headed much higher. These idiot liberal interventionist
> > politicians we have elected, like Dalton McGuinty, Barack Obama and Al
> > Gore (a former unsuccessful Democrat candidate in the U.S. should be
> > taken out to the woodshed and whipped--hard.
>
> > Ontarians can fortunately send McGuinty and socialists packing in a

> > fall election, but American's must wait another
> > two years before sending "the anointed one" packing.
>
> That just proves Canada isn't capable of developing new technologies and
> making them profitable.


 Denmark created a profitable wind power
> industry, one that employs 20,000 people and brings the economy 3
> billion euros.

Where did you read this? In the Guardian?

 Plus it provides about 25% of their total generation
> capacity.  They pay a bit more for power but at least they are getting
> away from dirty coal and oil and nuclear energy that produces wastes
> that will still be toxic 100,000 years after we're all dead.
>

> The politics of oil is one of the most destructive forces on the planet.- Hide quoted text -


>
> - Show quoted text -

Bullshit! If that were true N.A. whould be a shambles and Western
Europe the shining city on the hill.

Kent T.

unread,
Feb 13, 2011, 11:56:38 AM2/13/11
to
Gary McClennan wrote

Interesting to note, that when you look at who runs the top Canadian wind farms.
The majority of them are fossil fuel corporations.


Chom Noamsky

unread,
Feb 13, 2011, 12:10:56 PM2/13/11
to

You are a moron. Did you know that tarsand-chewing Alberta now has 806
MW of installed wind generation capacity? Per capita Alberta has more
wind power than Ontario, enough for 200,000 Alberta homes and
businesses. Why would conservative, PC Tory blue Alberta bother with
developing wind power when the province has 60% of Canada's fossil
fuels? Alberta is proving that even without subsidies wind can be
competitive and profitable with fossil fuels. And what effect does wind
have on Alberta's oil and gas? It means more of the fucking stuff to
export to markets where they can get a better price for it. Why is it
Alberta has the brains to make wind work but Ontario industry doesn't?
Too many student retarded by teachers like you in the classroom, I suppose.

Jedi

unread,
Feb 13, 2011, 12:33:01 PM2/13/11
to
On Feb 13, 11:48 am, Tater Gumfries <gumfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wind power is a good idea for places with lots of wind like Wyoming
> and New Mexico and such.
>
> Tater

If Tater had a map, he would notice that Alberta Canada is directly
north of Wyoming.

And wind power is not only a prairie idea, wind power is also at its
best when its driven by inshore winds like those off of the Atlantic
ocean or the southern side of the Great Lakes.

That's why (that despicable money losing socialist corporate empire)
Google and the Japanese trading house Marubeni are investing $billions
to build an undersea cable that will act as a transmission system for
a network of wind farms off the east coast of the United States, the
companies announced Tuesday.

The New York Times reported that the first stage of the project would
cost some 1.2 billion dollars. The project's first phase of
construction is expected to begin in 2013, with completion expected in
2016, the companies said. The plan calls for a 5-billion-dollar
investment over five years.

"We are investing 37.5 per cent of the equity in this initial
development stage, with the goal of obtaining all the necessary
approvals to finance and begin constructing the line," Google said on
its official blog. "Although the development stage requires only a
small part of the total estimated project budget, it represents a
critical stage."

Construction of the grid would mark the most significant development
for wind power in the US, which has lagged behind many other
industrialized countries in developing alternative energy sources.

Well Done

unread,
Feb 14, 2011, 10:00:27 PM2/14/11
to
"Kennewick Man; the first, the BEST!" <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
Easy, now, Kenne, don't want to rile the "wind power will save us"
crew. They're too busy telling us the positive side of the ledger is
the only side. Fact is you could build so many windmills that the
Earth's rotation would be affected and you would STILL need all the
traditional power generations sources. All of them and new ones.

>In 1998, Norway commissioned a study of wind power in Denmark and
>concluded that it has "serious environmental effects, insufficient
>production, and high production costs."
>
>Denmark (population 5.3 million) has over 6,000 turbines that produced
>electricity equal to 19% of what the country used in 2002. Yet no
>conventional power plant has been shut down. Because of the
>intermittency and variability of the wind, conventional power plants
>must be kept running at full capacity to meet the actual demand for
>electricity. Most cannot simply be turned on and off as the wind dies
>and rises, and the quick ramping up and down of those that can be
>would actually increase their output of pollution and carbon dioxide
>(the primary "greenhouse" gas). So when the wind is blowing just right
>for the turbines, the power they generate is usually a surplus and
>sold to other countries at an extremely discounted price, or the
>turbines are simply shut off.

--
): "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" :(
(: Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net :)

Chom Noamsky

unread,
Feb 15, 2011, 12:36:31 AM2/15/11
to
On 2/14/2011 7:00 PM, Well Done wrote:
> "Kennewick Man; the first, the BEST!"<rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
> Easy, now, Kenne, don't want to rile the "wind power will save us"
> crew. They're too busy telling us the positive side of the ledger is
> the only side. Fact is you could build so many windmills that the
> Earth's rotation would be affected and you would STILL need all the
> traditional power generations sources. All of them and new ones.

What you gonna burn in them traditional generators when oil is
$900/barrel and coal is $1500/tonne?

SaPeIsMa

unread,
Feb 15, 2011, 6:15:19 PM2/15/11
to
"Chom Noamsky" <blah...@blahblahblah.com> wrote in message
news:EqadnTKzke18jcfQ...@giganews.com...

Obama Dollars.

Canuck57

unread,
Feb 19, 2011, 11:51:14 AM2/19/11
to

No, we use those for toilet paper.


--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.

simplicity

unread,
Feb 19, 2011, 10:37:28 PM2/19/11
to
On Feb 12, 10:58 pm, Chom Noamsky <blahb...@blahblahblah.com> wrote:
>
> That just proves Canada isn't capable of developing new technologies and
> making them profitable.

And how exactly is it Canada's fault that generating energy from wind
is not economically viable?

> Denmark created a profitable wind power
> industry,

Profitable? How can the same thing be profitable in one place and cost
10 times the market value in other?

Unless Denmark is on another planet I just don't get it.

> one that employs 20,000 people and brings the economy 3
> billion euros.  Plus it provides about 25% of their total generation
> capacity.  They pay a bit more for power

Oh, I see. A "bit more". Can you specify the size of that "bit".

> but at least they are getting
> away from dirty coal and oil and nuclear energy that produces wastes
> that will still be toxic 100,000 years after we're all dead.

Have you ever thought about environmental impact of harvesting wind
energy? I don't think so.

> The politics of oil is one of the most destructive forces on the planet.

This is al-gorism at its best. And I thought you were non-religious,
Chapsky....

simplicity

unread,
Feb 19, 2011, 10:39:51 PM2/19/11
to
On Feb 14, 10:36 pm, Chom Noamsky <blahb...@blahblahblah.com> wrote:
> On 2/14/2011 7:00 PM, Well Done wrote:
>
> > "Kennewick Man;  the first, the BEST!"<rander3...@gmail.com>  wrote:

>
> > Easy, now, Kenne, don't want to rile the "wind power will save us"
> > crew.  They're too busy telling us the positive side of the ledger is
> > the only side.  Fact is you could build so many windmills that the
> > Earth's rotation would be affected and you would STILL need all the
> > traditional power generations sources.  All of them and new ones.
>
> What you gonna burn in them traditional generators when oil is
> $900/barrel and coal is $1500/tonne?

This will be the time when windmills become a viable alternative.

It is called economy, Chapsky.

simplicity

unread,
Feb 20, 2011, 12:26:55 AM2/20/11
to
On Feb 13, 10:10 am, Chom Noamsky <blahb...@blahblahblah.com> wrote:
> Why is it
> Alberta has the brains to make wind work but Ontario industry doesn't?

Good question, Chapsky. Let me give you couple suggestions as possible
answers.
(1) Alberta: industry. Ontario: government. When was the last time you
saw the government doing something properly?
If not (1) then maybe:
(2) Alberta: conservative. Ontario: liberal. When was the last time
you saw the liberals doing something properly?
If not (1) or (2) then maybe:
(3) Alberta: does what makes common sense. Ontario: does what the
ruling elite thinks will save the face of the notorious liar liberal
premier and his cohorts no matter how stupid it is.

Any picks?

Neil

unread,
Feb 20, 2011, 12:32:51 AM2/20/11
to

its not an ' al-gorism' ; its his rules ( reasons) or code for his
opposition to climate change ...... its an " al-goritim"

Liberals are vermin

unread,
Feb 20, 2011, 4:15:09 AM2/20/11
to
On Feb 12, 7:50 pm, Phil <clayno...@gmail.com> wrote:

As long as the vile elitist urban liberals think the lower-middle
class will pay for this insanity they will support it.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages