http://envirolaw.com/precautionary-principle-block-wind-energy/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=precautionary-principle-block-wind-energy News and analysis (not advice) by a top Ontario environmental lawyer Fri, 18 May 2012 00:34:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://envirolaw.com/precautionary-principle-block-wind-energy/comment-page-1/#comment-634 Clare Tue, 15 Dec 2009 05:38:17 +0000 http://envirolaw.com/?p=1865#comment-634 Considering the mounting scientific evidence linking a number of adverse health effects to currently operating wind turbine projects in Ontario, the demand for a review of the regulations that govern such development is not unreasonable or unjustified. While Mr. Hanna's argument may not succeed, it is important for the Government of Ontario to understand that rural communities will continue to be vigilant about initiatives which have the potential to significantly restrict the use and enjoyment of their property. If government officials and wind energy proponents wish to secure the trust and support of the public, they must earn it by improving the level of transparency. The public, wind energy proponents and the government must all work together to produce a process which is transparent, honest and equitable. If the science endorsed by the wind energy industry is reliable, I encourage patience. Aggressive wind energy developers hasty to acquire government approvals without adequate public consultation has been well documented in communities across Ontario. This only heightens suspicion and scrutiny from the public, sentiments which, considering the circumstances are warranted. The Government of Ontario owes a duty to its citizens to ensure that wind energy regulations will protect their health, their property rights, and the environment. This may be achieved by independent studies which investigate these public concerns. The assertion that wind energy is the lesser of two evils is not an acceptable standard on which to approve further development. It is easy to be a cynic, but it is the efforts of people like Mr. Hanna which act to promote political and scientific integrity. Considering the mounting scientific evidence linking a number of adverse health effects to currently operating wind turbine projects in Ontario, the demand for a review of the regulations that govern such development is not unreasonable or unjustified. While Mr. Hanna's argument may not succeed, it is important for the Government of Ontario to understand that rural communities will continue to be vigilant about initiatives which have the potential to significantly restrict the use and enjoyment of their property. If government officials and wind energy proponents wish to secure the trust and support of the public, they must earn it by improving the level of transparency. The public, wind energy proponents and the government must all work together to produce a process which is transparent, honest and equitable. If the science endorsed by the wind energy industry is reliable, I encourage patience. Aggressive wind energy developers hasty to acquire government approvals without adequate public consultation has been well documented in communities across Ontario. This only heightens suspicion and scrutiny from the public, sentiments which, considering the circumstances are warranted. The Government of Ontario owes a duty to its citizens to ensure that wind energy regulations will protect their health, their property rights, and the environment. This may be achieved by independent studies which investigate these public concerns. The assertion that wind energy is the lesser of two evils is not an acceptable standard on which to approve further development.
It is easy to be a cynic, but it is the efforts of people like Mr. Hanna which act to promote political and scientific integrity.

]]>