Latest Comments

Bob Viscount

In response to: Robertson takes strong stand on industrial wind: offers positive way forward

Bob Viscount [Visitor]
It is ironic that a Federal Politician wishes to argue about how the provincial green energy act is taking away our right to democracy at the "local" level. I can only hope that in defence of the province you will publish this link. Some of the supporters are true anti-democratic types like farmers, natives, environmentalists
PermalinkPermalink 03/21/11 @ 12:07

In response to: Robertson takes strong stand on industrial wind: offers positive way forward

Djmike [Visitor]
Robertson has a long track record of looking for solutions to problems. He does not play the blame game attack politics of this government. As such, Robertson outlines in his position statement potential ways government could act in ways so that we in Huron-Bruce could save money on our energy and heating bills, protect the environment and create long lasting jobs.
PermalinkPermalink 03/13/11 @ 11:20
Bob Viscount

In response to: Robertson takes strong stand on industrial wind: offers positive way forward

Bob Viscount [Visitor]
Some people feel that it is neccesary that I need to go to a different site to respond to to articles placed on this site. No I DON't!!
I did not choose to start a discussion on THIS site I chose THIS site, not some politicians personal message site. Please understand tha if Mr. Robertson wishes to use this site to publicize his policies then he should maintain a presence on THIS site. If I choose to respond to articles on this site it is not my obligation to go elsewhere for resolution of discussions. I can only suppose that those who are attacking me, are suporters of Mr. Robertson, but if you wish to convert people YOU need to reach out, I already have a political opinion that does not include ensuring that the ruling party stays in power.
PermalinkPermalink 03/06/11 @ 07:09
D Adamsom

In response to: Robertson takes strong stand on industrial wind: offers positive way forward

D Adamsom [Visitor]
To bad before you decided to attack Mr. Robertson you didn't bother to read beyond the media release ABOUT the position statement. The link is right there to the whole document. He makes it clear that there are roles the federal government could play and talks about specific areas he would work on.
Too bad it is so much easier to attack.
PermalinkPermalink 02/03/11 @ 12:59
Bob Viscount

In response to: Robertson takes strong stand on industrial wind: offers positive way forward

Bob Viscount [Visitor]
I'm sure it is easy to tell me what I want to hear without telling me how I am going to do it
A lot of what I have read in this "Press Release" is essentialy a Federal Candidate giving me policy based on Provincial Jurisdictions. Tell me how the Federal Government is going to tell the difference between the portion of my electrical bill that suppliments my wood-heat. If you want a Provincial platform tell me why I have to pay outrageous bills when everyone I know in the horeshoe gets a huge off-hours discount when I can't, at a 60% discount I think I can make a case for the viability of economic battery charging to be used during peak hours. This same system could be metered to charge a home based battery bank by wind power when it is available. It is easy to look at the existing problems without looking at the future alternatives and potential resolutions.
If I look at tomorrow with yesterdays eyes I will never reach my potential. Yes I want an alternative in both Parliaments but I want real and applicable policy that is explained in both purpose and process please
PermalinkPermalink 02/02/11 @ 14:34
Moe Anderson

In response to: Robertson takes strong stand on industrial wind: offers positive way forward

Moe Anderson [Visitor]
Bravo to Mr. Robertson! Someone actually speaking for the people rather than big business and lobbyists.
PermalinkPermalink 02/02/11 @ 10:42

In response to: Wind without storage depends on fossils

Keith [Visitor]
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing".

The reason Jack Gibbons never mentions hydraulic energy storage in Ontario is because it's not possible. Quebec has the potential, but they also have their own growing wind industry and the grid could only handle a fraction of the proposed 10,000MW of wind they plan on adding to the grid.

This is why Ontario is building more highly inefficient gas peaker plants. The industry speaks to the issue themselves. You can't have Industrial Wind Turbines without gas:
PermalinkPermalink 01/16/11 @ 04:52
Bob McKay

In response to: Wind Plants are Gas Plants - Robert F Kennedy Jr.

Bob McKay [Visitor]
It is reassuring to see some rationale debate about central concerns with "wind turbines". The rhetoric - "pulling wool over eyes" stimulates polarized views which twists embellishment into evangelical "dogma".

The reality is, I think??, that not only is wind and solar production variable but isn't also electricity consumption? Please turn off those nuclear power plants daily at 1 am when demand is lowest.

Why do we hear so little about new technologies for storing energy. Has Hydrogen been dismissed as a possible energy currency? Hey you engineers - FIX IT!
PermalinkPermalink 12/17/10 @ 06:19
Ziggy Kleinau

In response to: Wind without storage depends on fossils

Ziggy Kleinau [Visitor]
Well, Keith conveniently forgets that Ontario has waterpower to back up the variable production from wind turbines.
Hydro-electric plants are baseload power and can be ramped up within a short time to compliment wind.
According to Ministry of Energy figures this province has over 7,000 MW of supply available which has never been used to its full extent to my knowledge.
WE need to know the full truth, Keith, even if you don't want to hear it.
PermalinkPermalink 12/04/10 @ 18:16
Glen Estill

In response to: Wind without storage depends on fossils

Glen Estill [Visitor]
We already have several thousand megawatts of storage in Ontario. This compares with about 1300 megawatts of wind. Water power supplies 25% of our electricity. We routinely cycle our water power up and down, by opening and closing the flows through the dams, to meet changes in demand. Installing wind or solar allows us to preserve water for use later. We have a couple thousand megawatts of connection to Quebec, which has multi year storage capability their reservoirs. We have pumped storage at Niagara, and are connected to New York which has larger pumped storage at Niagara. Finally, we have very large natural gas storage capability, and coal piles. When the wind is blowing, or the sun is shining, let the gas stay in a cavern, and the coal stay in a pile. Storage? We've got enough to go to 20% supply from wind, a 10 fold increase, with virtually no other changes in the system. Then we can worry about it.

As for birds, perhaps we should do something about house cats too - a cat kills way more than a wind turbine does. And we have hundreds of wind turbines compared to millions of cats. Maybe cars too - they also kill more birds than a wind turbine.

Can we do something about use of fossil fuels? Absolutely. We are limited only by our closed minds.
PermalinkPermalink 12/01/10 @ 19:30

In response to: Wind without storage depends on fossils

Keith [Visitor]
Environmental degradation is a symptom of economic depravation. Our global economic systems are growth dependent yet we live on a finite planet. If the billions of dollars being spent on Industrial Wind Turbines were spent instead on energy conservation we would only need a fraction of the energy we currently produce. Instead, in our current economic climate, it makes more sense to continue to waste energy and come up with new ways of generating and wasting it (growth). Energy conservation is bad for the economy (zero or negative growth). At some point growth dependency on a finite planet will no longer work.

We might be there already.

Here's another link, pretty basic but you get an idea of how the grid works.

Check out "A Bad FIT"
PermalinkPermalink 12/01/10 @ 11:05

In response to: Shoreline Waterwells

Julie [Visitor]

I think that people should try to preserve the pristine nature at least for their offspring! Because the environment is already alarming, and what will happen next, no one knows!
PermalinkPermalink 04/14/09 @ 05:32

In response to: Shoreline Waterwells

Helen [Visitor]
I am always very sad when people destroy nature for their benefit. After all, our children will live on this earth, let think about them.
PermalinkPermalink 03/20/09 @ 05:52
Bob McKay

In response to: The environmental movement has failed

Bob McKay [Visitor]
As one of those people who have built a new home in the Northern Bruce I feel a deep sense of intrusion in the local natural environment. We never realized so many trees had to be sacrificed.

On the other hand - isn't it more effective to think in terms of "dynamic realities". Humans are nature. Even the most self righteous advocates of "Green", fly to "Bali" to discuss the issues.

What can we do other than "disappear"? A debate on David Sanborne Scott's "Smelling Land" might be an alternative to "doom and gloom"?
PermalinkPermalink 01/31/08 @ 08:11
Don McIlraith

In response to: The environmental movement has failed

Don McIlraith [Visitor]
Global warming and the environment in general has become the #1 political concern in Canada. People are concerned and according to the polls now finally willing to do something about it. It is very difficult although by no means impossible for individuals to do a lot without political decisions and regulations to 'level the playing field' for larger industries and society in general. The issue has come to the fore for many reasons - news coverage, unusual,violent stormy weather, the many books and Al Gore's film 'An Inconvenient Truth' and so on apparently leading to a 'critical mass' of public opinion.
As a person with a long time interest and involvement in environmental affairs I can certainly attest to the frustration and anger that one experiences at the slow pace of awareness and change.But that does not mean one need give up and go hide in the disappearing woods. One can just go on doing what one can within the usually narrow confines of one's ability. This might be educating and local project work, writing letters, protesting or even more extreme forms of drawing attention to the issues. Modern history has shown the ability of society to turn around rapidly and even within months completely converting industry and technology to another purpose as did North Americans in the Second World War. If people perceive a crisis then action is possible.
On the other hand one can only shake one's head at the completely idiotic politicing and the extreme hypocracy being shown by our representatives in Ottawa at present. That's what really irks me!
PermalinkPermalink 01/30/07 @ 07:10

In response to: Book review by Glen Estill

destrocalypse [Member]
"We can't have it all. The belief that we can is one of the things that have driven us to this awful place. If insanity could be defined as having lost functional connection with physical reality, to believe we can have it all- to believe we can simultaneously dismantle a world and live on it; to believe we can perpetually use more energy than arrives from the sun; to believe a finite world can support infinite growth,much less economic growth, where economic growth consists of converting ever larger numbers of living beings to dead objects (trees, fish, cultures, endangered species etc. take your pick)-is grotesquely insane. This insanity manifests partly as a potent disrespect for limits and for justice. To pretend our present civilization can exist without destroying its own landbase and the landbases and cultures of others is to be entirely ignorant of history, biology, thermodynamics, morality, and self-preservation. This culture as a whole and most of its members are insane. The culture is driven by a death urge, an urge to destroy life". dj
PermalinkPermalink 01/18/07 @ 10:29
Donna Dilschneider

In response to: revisiting recycling

Donna Dilschneider [Visitor]
The mess at the recycling bins is appalling and certainly needs to be cleaned up. But while I agree with your suggestions for solving the problem, I think we should also take a close look at ourselves and our habits as consumers. Why are we creating so much garbage in the first place? Why are we throwing away so much stuff? Remember that recycling is the last of the three R's so let's get our priorities right: REDUCE, REUSE, and, as a last resort, recycle.

Another thing: Yes, the site needs to be better run but why on earth would anyone just dump their stuff when the bins are full? Take it home and bring it back another day instead of expecting somebody else to clean up after you. Have some consideration for other users as well as for the countryside.
PermalinkPermalink 01/07/07 @ 08:10
Barbara Bobo

In response to: bottled water

Barbara Bobo [Visitor]
I salute this plan.

Several years ago "Natural History" a magazine published by the Smithsonian ran a full length article about the effects of the plastics used in these water bottles as well as tons of other bottles...even liquer is in plastic now. The stunning upshot of this article was that this type of plastic stimulated estrogen dependent breast cancer cells, This was an accidental discovery as the researchers were just doing a routine test and the control group's cancer cells multiplied just as rapidly as the innoculated cells. They repeated their experiment and discovered it was being caused by the "new" plastic covers on the petri dishes made by Dow or Corning (I cannot remember which) and the manufacturers refused to give the researches the formula for the plastic since it was propriotory information.

I have found it nearly impossible to find water in anything but this type of plastic...however sparkling water can still be found in glass. And yes, we do still buy water in these infernal containers.

When I was teaching tincture making this summer I discovered how many alcoholic beverages are being sold, as well as how hard it is to buy nearly anything in glass in the grocery store...mayonnaise etc. I needed glass jars in which to macerate my tinctures in sunlight before was an eye do we make healthful products if the raw ingredients are packaged in this unhealthful plastic.....Pandora's box is Plastic!!!!
PermalinkPermalink 09/25/06 @ 15:31
Stephen Hood

In response to: the ethanol debate

Stephen Hood [Visitor]
I agree with most of what you have saod, but would like to add a few comments. Net loss is a relative term, especially when comparing renewable fuels against fossil fuels. Eeven a net loss fuel may represent a reasonable 'bridge', helping us to reduce dependency on fossil fuels, while better alternatives are being developed. A key challenge though is in the economics of alternative fuels. Many of us may be willing to pay a premium, but too high a premium will limit their market penetration I think that's why ethanol has mostly been used in limited additive quantities to gasoline, or promoted as an octane improver.

I agree about our carbon footprint being a major problem, and am most concerned that it will precipitate the decline of our civilization if we don't take it very seriously. Judging from the positions of Mssrs Harper and Bush on this matter, it's not looking good right now.

But consider this; all that we can do to reduce energy to heat and light our homes pales in comparison to the non-renewable, CO2 heavy energy that is being wasted in our tailpipes every day. The typical automobile is about 15% efficient, wasting 85% of its combustion energy to the atmosphere. Transportation has surely got to be one of our biggest environmental challenges.
PermalinkPermalink 09/24/06 @ 17:14
Barbara Bobo

In response to: global warming - the cynic and the sceptic

Barbara Bobo [Visitor]
Thanks Don,

I think this issue is "hot" in more ways than one...and it would be interesting to know if Al Gore's (My president!!) movie has reached Canadian audiences.
If anyone up here has seen it...please let Alan and I know if it is still playing and where. I assume it will be available on DVD soon and I would think it would be an excellent program for us. I have read that he provides other materials for groups and individuals that want to present it to city councils, politicians, etc.

On the lighter side...a recent quote in The New Yorker from my president 'select' "W" Bush on ethanol...."there are limits to how much corn can be used for ethanol...after all we got to eat some." see more on the "Bush Quiz "in Shouts and Murmers p. 42 in the August 7 &14 issue.
PermalinkPermalink 09/18/06 @ 16:03