Q & A with Hudak on wind turbines
London Free Press (video)
Q: You’ve talked about putting a moratorium on new wind-farm developments. Would that extend to projects already approved and not yet built? Where would the line be?
They’ve got about 10,000 contracts that are somewhere in the pipeline today and there are different stages of contracts. So you have to be practical. What is going to have the least impact on the taxpayer? So, the contracts that have not been signed, you don’t sign any more. Those that are up and producing power, you respect those. Those that are in-between, the energy minister needs to have a system to make the call: Is it better to follow the contract all the way through and add on the power and build the transmission and the risk of having to export (unneeded power) to the States and pay them to take our power, versus using the termination clause in the contract? You’ve got be thoughtful, practical.
Q: What about local control over where these things go?
Re-establish that. Lambton County, Chatham, Middlesex — you should have a say on these projects.
Q: Final say?
Yes. This is not something new. This is the traditional way of doing it. Just like it exists for a Tim Hortons or a hot-dog stand or a new Walmart coming into town.
Q: Would a Progressive Conservative government support wind farms in the Great Lakes?
You point out an important irony. You had the (Liberal) government that did a moratorium in the lakes (on wind turbines) to protect the fish and the birds. What about people? Why didn’t we take a similar approach to land-based wind turbines? I don’t see adding on wind farms in the lakes, in our provincial parks, on the Niagara Escarpment. Read article