chinook35

Wind Turbines on Lake Ontario!

Recommended Posts

NIMBY all over again.

The truth is that we have an energy problem.It is also true that windmills can be part of the solution.

Accusing Albany of a problem that we are all partly responsible for creating does not strike me as being effective in any way.

As for letting business people run it... ENRON,CHRYSLER,GMC,AIG,THE BANKS,WALLSTREET. Private business is potentially just as corrupt and greedy as government can be.

On the positive end of things.Windmills do produce energy.They also provide a lot of local work for maintenance.

The general attitude of not wanting change here,will make that change happen somewhere else and we will become a third world country,with only ourselves to blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If in fact that these things are inevitable, perhaps a deal could be struct with the owners of them to offset the impact that they would have on the fishery. Like fully funding of Altmar & other hatcheries & monitering, & maintainence& the manpower to do it. The oil dericks in the Gulf of Mexic oare fish havens so it might not be as bad as we may think. We need power & be independent of foreign so if it is going to happen , maybe it would be in their best intrest from a public relation standpoint to give back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If in fact that these things are inevitable, perhaps a deal could be struct with the owners of them to offset the impact that they would have on the fishery. Like fully funding of Altmar & other hatcheries & monitering, & maintainence& the manpower to do it. The oil dericks in the Gulf of Mexic oare fish havens so it might not be as bad as we may think. We need power & be independent of foreign so if it is going to happen , maybe it would be in their best intrest from a public relation standpoint to give back.

There is probably a lot to be gained when that sort of bartering is done in a smart way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Been,

I understand your views here, as we do need to somehow focus on alternative power and energy ideas. I am in no way opposed to windfarms to generate power. I actually was amazed at the farm in Lowville when I drove up to see it for the first time. There is a set of windmills on top of a hill in Bear Creek, PA, able to be seen from the Northeast Extension, which I look forward to seeing every time I make my 5 hour drive to and from the lake. These farms are in areas which do not affect normal day to day activities. The proposed windfarms for Lake Ontario WILL affect our fishery and the sport we have all come to enjoy. The issue with these farms isn't having them in the water, but WHERE they plan to install them. The preliminary proposal is for them to be installed in the 150 FOW area - prime fishing areas during the season. Do you think we will be allowed to fish anywhere near these turbines? No way! It will be just like the 9-Mile Point nuke plant was after 9/11 - restricted zones. What about the power transmission lines? The lines will have to be run underwater. Downrigger balls often track very close to the bottom of the lake where these lines will be run. Just in Mexico Bay alone, they are proposing 560 of these turbines. That is like taking the entire Lowville farm and putting it in the water where hundreds of thousands of boats troll during the fishing season. Think about the annual fishing derbies and tournaments on the lake and how they will be affected.

On another aspect of this, as a property owner along Mexico Bay, I know how far out 150 FOW is from shore. I have been coming to the lake and enjoying my time there since I was a child. My family has always had property along the shores of Mexico Bay. 6 years ago, I had the opportunity to purchase a waterfront home along Mexico Bay. I have come to enjoy the sunsets, the peace and quiet and the serenity the view offers. I refuse to look out over the water, just offshore, and see an entire farm of windmills spinning. No way! Property values will go down, people will sell their homes, taxes will go up (already proven in other areas as valid consequences of windfarms offshore near homes). As I said above, I am not against windfarms to help generate power. I am against having them installed where I will see them ALL the time when I look out over the water and where myself and thousands of other avid fishermen spend their lazy days of summer. If this project goes through, we may as well all sell our boats, because we will not be able to use them anymore where we use them now. You may tell us to just move to another location to fish, but when you are talking about 560 turbines in one area alone, where do you go? Another thought on these turbines. I have found out that the power generated by these turbines will NOT be used to power the area they inhabit. All power will be transferred downstate. I have an issue with that. If downstate needs more power and windfarms are the answer, there are plenty of places downstate to put windfarms, such as on top of mountains or uninhabited hills.

Ok, I'm done...for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really have to take issue with the idea of these "forbidden areas"

After 9/11 there was a fear of terrorist activity which, if aimed at nuclear plants can indeed cause a disaster.There is no reasonable comparison between a windmill and a nuclear plant because windmills do not have radiation or fall out or any other disastrous result if attacked.The worst that can happen is that one or two out of a proposed 560 generators can fall down. That would hardly be a terrorist target.Therefore I do believe that forbidden zones will not be more than safety areas right under the propellers where I would not want to be anyway.

I travel quite frequently in Europe and I have seen the huge wind mill farms off the Dutch and German coast in the North Sea. They are mostly greyish and sort of melt into the landscape.Most Germans and Dutchmen I talked with and asked about these wind mills said that they got used to them and they are now part of the landscape,almost like they were always there.Many people were quite proud that they were doing something about the energy crisis.

If you ever have a chance to travel in North West Germany or North East Holland you will see very many "wind farms" with cows grazing underneath and dairy farmers are happy to be wind farmers as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now Misty I want you to think about what you are saying here. As I look at the shorelines of every Bay & lake both ontario & fingerlakes I see docks & homes & cottages on just about every foot that is buildable. Some may say that is unsightly. A lot of the best fishing is right under the docks. The security For those plants mentioned were for nukes I belive. The mills in Lowville are right out in the open. You can walk right up to them. I have seem the mills in a few locals & don't think they are that bad . I would rather not have them but I use elec. & you can't have it both ways. I would rather see them out there than on land . Less impact on humans . I think nuke plants are more efficiant but nobody wants to be neighbors of them . I would have to see the specs & regs about fishing around them before I can make a decicion but I think it is just a matter of time before we see them out there in some capacity so lets try to get something positive out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a question. How far out into Lake Ontario is under a county that borders the lake juristiction?

County lines extend to the high water line at their border.The Lake is State,not County.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The windmills themselves probably won’t affect the fishing as they'll be way above water level. However towers, security, maintenance and underwater electrical cables will.

Some of you guys run black boxes thinking a slight positive charge will attract fish. What will thousands of volts do? (Must be very high voltage to travel very far) The Army Corps of Engineers thinks electrical fields will keep the Asian carp contained. Those electrical fields will disrupt the E-W movement of salmon & trout around the lake. Additionally, people complain about their noise – noise is amplified & travels faster through water. How will that constant rumble transmitted through the tower affect aquatic life? (Fishermen generally try to be fairly quite when out there.) Lake Trout habitat will definitely be affected. We don’t need any new navigational hazards. The quantity they’re talking about will affect nearshore currents, especially in 100-150 FOW range.

On the plus side: Quagga mussels will get a new home. (Then the power company can use fish killing chemicals or ultrasonics to get them off the connections - not a plus) Ragboats can race around them instead of their marker buoys. They should be great lightning rods & help attract thunderstorms out there. Off the Genny, planes probably wouldn’t be able to fly so low on their approach to the airport. (Air shows off Ontario beach probably won’t be as spectacular-not really a plus). Boaters crash into jetties every year - another thousand towers out there should help thin out the idiot population.

If the state & the project backers had any brains they’d put them down the median of the NYS Thruway. State already owns that land; noise would be muffled by traffic noise; much shorter transmission lines to communities; with ¼ mile spacing they could install over 1,600; accessibility for maintenance (especially in winter) would be easier & cheaper; security would be easier (State troopers everywhere, air surveillance already in place. Even if they posted security guards 24/7 on each one, it’d be cheaper upkeep); possibly a few woodchucks but no cows to worry about. PR would be great as all the out of state travelers could witness first hand how "green' we are. (maybe up the toll - tourist attraction - 9th wonder of the world?)

Everyone else wants to see windmill farms – “but not in my backyard.†As long as I can’t have a small one on my house to provide my own electrical needs then you can’t have a windmill farm on my lake. You want to mess with my only recreation and then make me pay for it, for someone else, and then raise my rates every year anyways. The purpose of this project is to make money for the guy that thought it up. It's not to be good to the people nor about us going green. It's an attempt to put big money in someone's pocket. The originator is not proposing this out of the goodness of his heart. He's trying to cash in on the environmental movement. If you want a windmill farm for NY City then put them on top of the buildings down there or off your own ocean beaches. Put them in your backyard, let the windmill farm affect the people that will benefit from it, which obviously won't be me.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I elect Tom (LongLine) to be the engineer. Great Idea on the Thruway! It goes right to the end recipient...NYC...Put them in series and let the power flow in that direction. There should be a copy of this post by him sent to the coneheads that want the stupid pinwheels.

Mark

edited by L&M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The windmills themselves probably won’t affect the fishing as they'll be way above water level. However towers, security, maintenance and underwater electrical cables will.

Some of you guys run black boxes thinking a slight positive charge will attract fish. What will thousands of volts do? (Must be very high voltage to travel very far) The Army Corps of Engineers thinks electrical fields will keep the Asian carp contained. Those electrical fields will disrupt the E-W movement of salmon & trout around the lake. Additionally, people complain about their noise – noise is amplified & travels faster through water. How will that constant rumble transmitted through the tower affect aquatic life? (Fishermen generally try to be fairly quite when out there.) Lake Trout habitat will definitely be affected. We don’t need any new navigational hazards. The quantity they’re talking about will affect nearshore currents, especially in 100-150 FOW range.

On the plus side: Quagga mussels will get a new home. (Then the power company can use fish killing chemicals or ultrasonics to get them off the connections - not a plus) Ragboats can race around them instead of their marker buoys. They should be great lightning rods & help attract thunderstorms out there. Off the Genny, planes probably wouldn’t be able to fly so low on their approach to the airport. (Air shows off Ontario beach probably won’t be as spectacular-not really a plus). Boaters crash into jetties every year - another thousand towers out there should help thin out the idiot population.

If the state & the project backers had any brains they’d put them down the median of the NYS Thruway. State already owns that land; noise would be muffled by traffic noise; much shorter transmission lines to communities; with ¼ mile spacing they could install over 1,600; accessibility for maintenance (especially in winter) would be easier & cheaper; security would be easier (State troopers everywhere, air surveillance already in place. Even if they posted security guards 24/7 on each one, it’d be cheaper upkeep); possibly a few woodchucks but no cows to worry about. PR would be great as all the out of state travelers could witness first hand how "green' we are. (maybe up the toll - tourist attraction - 9th wonder of the world?)

Everyone else wants to see windmill farms – “but not in my backyard.†As long as I can’t have a small one on my house to provide my own electrical needs then you can’t have a windmill farm on my lake. You want to mess with my only recreation and then make me pay for it, for someone else, and then raise my rates every year anyways. The purpose of this project is to make money for the guy that thought it up. It's not to be good to the people nor about us going green. It's an attempt to put big money in someone's pocket. The originator is not proposing this out of the goodness of his heart. He's trying to cash in on the environmental movement. If you want a windmill farm for NY City then put them on top of the buildings down there or off your own ocean beaches. Put them in your backyard, let the windmill farm affect the people that will benefit from it, which obviously won't be me.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

Great post, Tom. Lots of thoughts and ideas. Well written! :clap:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are underwater cables in many places that supply elec to islands and such. I think the fish will find & swim up their spawning rivers just fine. I am quite sure that the noise will be drown out by the waves the wind will also create. once the sealed connetions are down why would they need to be cleaned? maybe the lakers will use the embutments for spawning structure. We are worried about planes? All preety weak arguments there Longline. We run gas or deisel powered boat up & down the lake. I 'm sure that has impact. My friend use to live on Long pond & the jet skies & water skiers were so loud he had to keep his windows shut & run the AC to sleep when he worked nights. And yup, its a money grab like most things are . It's all about the dollar & to a certain extent it should be. I don't think it will be as bad as we think. We need more electric every day & it don't come from the Jelly bean fields. And yes , put them on the thruway also. I like nukes , more efficient. My guess is they will be out there soon & the fisherman won't have much to say about it, so lets get something out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The proposal calls for many windmills to be installed along the entire South shore in roughly 150 FOW. Therefore transmission lines would run North-South. As stated previously: Army Corps of Engineers is using Electric fields to block passage of fish upstream to repel them & prevent them from entering the Great Lakes, so to say Electric fields will not disrupt fish in Lake Ontario is total bunk. (There is a daily E-W migration, not just the fall run upstream.) Just as it’s also total bunk to compare effects of a single 480v electrical distribution line to some island to a thousand 100,000+v transmission lines.

As to maintenance on underwater transmission lines, ever hear of galvanic corrosion? How about the effects of organic matter on steel? Or water erosion on concrete? (Look at the piers & breakwall of your favorite port) Guess project backers have never seen the corona effect on overland transmission lines nor ever heard of the ionization field that they cause. i.e. creation of nitrates. (the stuff algae thrives & “blooms†on)

We all need more electricity? Guess no one has told project backers that the population of NY has declined in the last 10 years or that most of the manufacturing has left NYS. Who needs more electricity? I’ve cut my usage down. (Too expensive, but then they raised my rates anyways because I’m using less & they still have to make their profits.) 3rd shift is gone, 2nd is just a skeleton, stores close at 9:00. Why are all the lights on in the skyscrapers of NYC at night? They need more so they can waste more?

Yes, Utility companies have to replace their out-dated plants with more efficient ones to supply periods of high demand. When are these high demand periods? During those hot, muggy summer days when everyone has their air conditioner on? And at night when all the lights of the city are on? Those same periods when there is no wind? No one told the project backers that windmills don’t produce electricity without wind. The utility company still has to build new efficient power plants just as a backup for those windmill blackout days & nights. If you need new plants for backup on those high demand days anyways, why bother with the trouble & expense of windmills? Just as they found out in Demark, Finland & Germany, that’s also why France has a moratorium on them.

It’s all about making a buck. The project backers tried to install a farm off Cape Cod a couple years ago; however, rich people (& Edward Kennedy) said “NO – Not in my backyard.†The project backers backed off & are now trying to “$crew†the little people in the name of “going green.†(one of the few things I agreed with him on)

Project backers may say these are “weak†arguments, but I haven’t seen a strong argument for messing with a multi-million dollar industry nor for putting them in my backyard.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I guess you are right about all that corrosion Nitrate corona effect stuff . I thought that to repel those asian fish they were going to put live current similar to fish shocking at Naples in the water, not heavily coated space age plastic cable. Those fish don't stand a chance with that. All that stuff going on, maybe you should contact theguys who must have overlooked all that stuff before puting up the thousands that are already in place. Those things would shurly have madesome elrc today out there. Could shut down those dirty coal fired plants a bit on days like today. Or save the water behind the dams for day that the wind won't blow. But wait , that would hurt us stream guys in the fall wanting to catch Trib Sal & Trout. And thats the most important thing . And that troublesome algea, getting on your line and making fishing hard. I would hate to see these investors make a profit on somthing of this nature. That would be just Un American. The guys who make , install & maintain them can all , well just eat cake! Plant more Jelly bean fields.I dont mind kissing the arab nations ass & spending 5 bucks for a gallon of gas, as long as the fishing is good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High voltage transmission lines are aluminum with steel support wires. Connectors are still metal. Carp barrier is pulsing DC. Carp got thru when it was shut down.

Unfortunately we'll have to turn the plants back on and run them through the cover of darkness just like so many other projects scammers like these have dreamt up. Won't have to kiss arab nation a$$ during the day - they're being replaced by the Dane's, Germans, Spanish & British. (makers of the turbines & now owners of the utility companies), but still have to kiss mid-east butts during the night. Yes, project backers certainly support the global economy.

Algea on line is not the problem. The toxic blue-green stuff that closes beaches due to health concerns is. To back up the windmills, they're going to have to build proper power plants anyways. If they have all this money to spend then spend it in wisely now, rather than just grab the tax credit & run away from the project when the credit runs out.

Billions for a windfarm yet Ginna sold for 1/2 billion? Could of heated a lot of buildings with the hot water it produced. Hey how about giving me some of that money? They've got so much to waste.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if they put em low enuf we could troll through the blades kinda like the blades on a minature golf course,,and it might sharpen the skills of some of those people who "own" the lake...or elimanate them :clap: ....as tom said the biggest drawback for wind is a backup system on the calm days or excessive windy days (i think) . also the skyline of any big city is visable for miles .we all are recomended to use mercury lighting,if anyone has ever taken one of these bulbs apart they contain a compteate circuit board (more electronic waste).. if all the highrises used LED lights they could reduce usage by 95%,, and as pretty as the lights in the cleavand buildings are i dont see much use for them to be lit up at 3 am when im driving by at 60mph,, and you cant really see them at ground level near the buildings. A little common sence and energy conservation would eleminate the need for any new massive projects... but as i say "HEY IM JUSTA PLUMMER".....And in 3 to 5 years when the billions of mercury bulbs go bad I wonder where they will go hmmm ,can you say new "supercleanup projects" or ship em to india for the kids there to dissamble for pennies a day. How about installing water turbines at the outlets of current coal and nuke plants, and extending the outflows 1000 more ft so we can fish them again,many small streams and rivers have enuf flow in ny state to install "old mill style " wheels without disrupting the fish in them with dams..and im shure if the hot water discharge was to flow through heat exchangers ,that hot water could heat 1000 homes near the plant expecially helpfull in areas with no nat gas lines and people use heating oil multiply that by 15000 (justa guess) power plants and now your saving some oil ,,,5 gal per day x 1.5 million homes "But im justa plummer" ..or dummer yet how about 100lbs of heat absorbing ceramic heat cells heated by a exhast bypass systen in cars when you get home just hook a small vent and resuse the heat from your trip home to heat the house for a bit or help.. how about a tax on peoples 10,000 sq ft retirement homes when there is only 2 people and a few pets living in them...I grew up in a 1200 sq ft home with 8 family members and im almost normal.Well now that ive exposed my dummer side i better go chase some turds.................Hmm hot air accumulators over washington , to reduce global warming :rofl: ,Opps Sorry Al.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes perfect sense Ray. I find 4 items very interesting on this topic:

-That the project backers never provide answers to people’s questions, rather they just brush them off with jibberish & say we need more energy without regard to anything else. They say there’s no proof of harmful effects. I for one don’t need proof that if I stick two fingers in an electrical socket that I’m going to get zapped, or if I slam my fingers in the door, it’ll hurt.

-That a Spanish company owns a big chunk of the NE power distribution grid and that Spain is a leading exporter of wind turbines. (There’s only one US company into making them.) Why should a Spanish company spend 500M on fixing up Russell station when they can stick it to US taxpayers for a few billion? (Buy their buddy’s turbines & help their own economy) Maybe they’ll bring them in on the Seaway so their ships can dump more ballast?

-That OSHA regulations (1910.269) declare a minimum approach distance to transmission lines at 27 Ft for all workers unless properly protected and that vehicles can’t be under them unless specially grounded. Yet project backers say no effect on lesser forms of wildlife? Oh well there goes 2,200 corridors from the windmills to shore that can’t be safely fished. (That’ll make for some interesting zig-zag trolling come spring time, not mention the fun the bass-guys are going to have fun drifting.) Where do the main transmission lines from units off Rochester go once on shore? Right through the city? Southeast through Irondequoit/Webster?

-That people would rally around a technology that solely depends upon something as unpredictable as the weather. (Yes, they have to be turned off in too high of a wind also) Blade sizing is based on average wind speed in an area. So if you have 0 wind for two days and 30 mph the next, you size the blade for 10 mph. The fact that the windmill couldn’t produce electricity on those three days doesn’t matter to them.

As to LEDs – really neat. I’ve used a windup LED to charge glos for a couple years now. Works great & no batteries. Also, just installed some LED tubes at work as a replacement to 4ft fluorescents. No mercury, no ballast, lots of bench light.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's always a pleasure to read the intelligent thoughts on this board. What is a shame is that Americans can't be the investors in such projects & for the life of me I don't know why. The "Hungry" forigners come to this country to make a profit & make their countries strongerand we let them. The opportunity is there for all of us but appathy does take its toll , to long a lot of us have had our heads in the sand ,but I digress.

Where is all the algea that frequntly closes the beaches now coming from? Is that the same stuff? And those connectors in the salt water must only last a few months or so.I wonder if they thought of that? . What will the new power plants run on ? Coal, Petrol, or nuKe? Lets put that nuke plant next to the War memorial so that we can heat downtown, Yea , that will work.Obama dosn't want clean coal ,he said that. My uneducated *** might not know all the tech stuff but I do have just a little common sense. We need a more efficient power source an d wind is a viable option .Admit it Longline your primary reason for not wanting them is personal , The fishing & estetics. It shows to me in your posts .I don't blame you for that. I really dont want them either .But a lot of your scientific reasons are assumption & we won't know for sure the effects on the fishing till they are in place if this goes thru.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You say my reasons are personal, just like your wanting (not needing) more electricity isn’t personal with you? You say you don’t really want it yet you jump on that bandwagon in a facetiously humorous way. I say that’s not the bandwagon to jump on in this case. I believe in the pledge at the top of the home page, and well, I don’t know if you do or not. (I lean towards not)

It’s not viable when it’s based on something so unpredictable. You’re asking us to stick our fingers in the doorway, slam the door and see if it hurts later. Common sense tells me that it’ll hurt without doing it. Your mode of thought said “Open the Seaway – It’s good for commerce.†It took some time to learn that lesson, but we’ve all learned what a mistake that was without safe-guard and how it really did change the Great Lakes. (Unfortunately not the way the proponents advertised) I ask questions and you humorously brush them aside or ignore them. Obviously those studies haven’t been done, much less even considered, in the race for the almighty dollar/tax credit and to see who can waste more, rather than conserve what we have.

There are other forms of alternate energy. There’s a lot more than coal, petro or nuke. You’re probably not aware that the Norwegians just brought an osmotic plant on line in the last week and are saying a single plant on the river Rhine will replace 5 large coal fired plants. (Overall capacity potential of 200 Terawatts in Europe.) StatKraft has been researching it for over 10 yrs as an alternative to the shortcomings of wind turbines in their country. Sounds like a perfect fit for NYC if they need more power. Located near the Hudson River & the Sound, it won't interfere with shipping either.

How about Wave Rollover? There’s another good fit for NYC that can be installed down there. Neither one makes any noise nor has any pollutants what so ever and both are based on predictable laws of nature and ever occurring natural events.

You say it’s a shame we can’t be investors. I agree…we can’t invest because we don’t have any money. Too many scammers and fast talkers with wild schemes backed by studies that say “minimal disruption†(but refuse to define minimal) make so much noise and get people to blindly jump on their bandwagon in the name of going green, only because it’s politically correct rather than backing it with solid data or concerns for real “quality of life†have at last drained the treasury.

I’ll let you get your last word of jibberish in. (See I’ll even make a guy like you happy…)

Tom B.

(LongLine)

p.s. Catch any fish this summer? oops...forgot you don't care about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE:

I've been in contact with numerous people working on preventing this project from going through and I have been asked to assist in another way. Everyone's help is needed.

A friend of mine who has been following this wind farm proposal from the beginning has been asked to speak at a meeting next week to give a perspective on the effects of the wind farms on residents, property, etc. He would like to go in there with some additional ammo, and give a report on the negative effects on the fishing industry and sport, and asked me to contact everyone I know from the lake for input. So, list below any additional negatives you have about this proposed project. I gave him the link to this forum, and he is now following along the discussions we have. He needs to have all info to him by the end of the weekend. Thanks again for your help and input!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The financing of this scheme with bonds obligated to be guaranteed by the taxpayers of New York State stinks.

Communities will lose out on tax revenues and private property owners will lose out on revenues. But another New York State Public Authority will further its lifespan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Tom (LongLine) has summed up every possible negative about the wind farm proposal and as well has been fair with those who would rather be passive and apathetic to it. I seems that we have the best of two worlds in him since he is very knowledgeable and also a great sportsman and advocate for the preservation of the fishing and sporting interests that are so valuable to a great many of us. I wish he could be a spokes person for us on that matter of the meeting.

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main thing to emphisize is that wind farms on the water are much more expensive and problematic than windfarms on the land and the harsh lake ontario environment will trash these egg beaters. This one paper says they don't even go out to work on the things unless waves are under 2.5 feet. If the towers are too close the will throw ice at each other. No one is going to work out there in the winter so if a tower goes bad you have to shut it down for months.

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6279

windland.ch/doku_wind/Ice_Off_Shore.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom seems to be knowledgable with the possible negative effects these turbines may have, however we need to prove that this negativity is certain. There are turbines right know running along Lake Erie from Hamburg beach to the South Gap and I have ,to my knowledge, not heard any negative problems from either the Charters who work this area or the local fishermen. This does not mean I agree with turbines but if nothing negative is coming from Erie what support do we have in Ontario?

We need to see what problems are coming from Erie.

Shade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.