To the Expositor:
Wind farms are quite obviously carbon friendly. The air moves across the vane like water across a canoe paddle (which apparently does not offend the great spirit).
Their appearance can be inspirational or repugnant—the beholder’s eye. Large windmills have an upside and a downside, as has everything in this imperfect world. On balance, they are well worth a considered try. The adverse health effects are anecdotal, self-interested and unsupported by scientific study; indeed, the major Canadian doctors’ organizations are pro-wind farm, considering the inevitable adverse health effects of oxidizing fossil fuels.
What is most interesting and, personally, concerning is the manner in which vociferous people from the anti-wind camp employ anecdotal health reports, increased costs, pleas for “more study” and appeals to a natural Eden of yesteryear—an Eden that never existed and comes closest to realization in the lovely homes and hobby farms of educated back-to-the-earthers—to protect their idyllic land holdings from unsightly apparati and to keep up property values. These enlightened people often discover a burning concern for the health of haters of windmills and welcome the type of lukewarm and political call for study such as recently issued by a Conservative Harper government which clearly wishes to bolster Conservative fortunes in Ontario and deflect honest criticism of the truly epic cash grab being undertaken in the oil sands of Alberta and Saskatchewan.
I suppose all’s fair in love and war and one cannot condemn the dissembling of the anti-wind people too harshly. However, one expects better from these self-interested, one-issue activists, many of whom must view themselves as loving and hip, except of course when technical realities, and the needs of us all, impinge upon their world.
Phil Dabous
Little Current
