Because some fool will think this is a good ideal in B.C.

OldBlackDog

Well-Known Member
OPINION: New turbines just as lethal as Annapolis turbines
B97623975Z.120161021182118000GK7F7D04.11.jpg

Much more needs to be said and written about the testing of tidal stream turbines in Minas Passage.

Graham Daborn, emeritus professor at Acadia University, wrote an Opinions article under this heading (Oct. 15), but without the “more”.

Unfortunately much of what has been said and written comes from the proponents of tidal power. And they have obscured the facts about what the physical properties of their machines can do to living organisms.

People living around Minas Basin still talk about what happened when the first turbine was installed at the FORCE (Fundy Ocean Research Center for Energy) experimental site in 2009.

Two humpback whales suddenly showed up on Minas Basin beaches with large gashes in their bodies. That turbine suddenly stopped working and when it was lifted in 2010 blades were broken. What broke them?

Large whales can move quickly. Nothing prevents them from leaving the southern Bay of Fundy in the morning to forage in Minas Passage that afternoon.

There was a Clean Current tidal turbine in B.C., but it was suddenly removed. Rumour among turbine engineers is that it killed a killer whale. Recently the deployment of turbines in Puget Sound was stopped because of concern for killer whales. (Google: Orca Conservancy)

Lobsters are very abundant in Minas Passage, as they migrate into and out of Minas Basin, where summer temperatures are 6-8 C higher than they are in the Bay of Fundy. Their behaviour has evolved from the fact that lobster larvae grow faster in warm water. Faster growth means higher survival.

Lobster fishers in Minas Passage benefit from this and where lobster catches in other areas drop off after the first few weeks of the season, Minas Passage catches remain consistently high. Do we want to upset this benefit to Nova Scotia? They have already lost two square kilometres of lobster bottom to the FORCE site.

Fact: There was a statement that the Cape Sharp tidal turbine is “nothing like the Annapolis turbine.”

Nothing could be further from the truth. Both are axial-flow, hydraulic lift turbines. Yes, the Annapolis turbine rotates 50 r.p.m., but it only has four blades. The Cape Sharp turbine will rotate at 10 r.p.m., but because it has ten blades, the distance between the rotating blades (water length) is almost the same (3.4 metres vs. four metres), making it as lethal as Annapolis.

Annapolis only operates about 11 hours a day on ebb tide. The Cape Sharp turbine will operate on both ebb and flood tide (23 hours a day), making it doubly dangerous.

Daborn states the Cape Sharp permits are for testing purposes only. Annapolis was installed as a test turbine and 31 years later it is still spinning, still killing fish (five sturgeon and counting this year). There never was an environmental assessment. Cape Sharp can keep putting in 2-megawatt turbines for years without triggering an assessment.

Michael Dadswell is a retired professor at Acadia University. He lives in Chester.
 
Tell us OBD is there any form of renewable energy that you find acceptable?
 
The logic used to compare the leathality of the two turbines doesn't really follow. The distance between the blades isn't the critical factor. The speed at which the tip of the blade moves through the water would be the factor determining whether a fish gets cut or not.
 
I think this guy just found the issue with wind turbines ;)
CvZ9sGOWAAAv2gJ.jpg
 
The logic used to compare the leathality of the two turbines doesn't really follow. The distance between the blades isn't the critical factor. The speed at which the tip of the blade moves through the water would be the factor determining whether a fish gets cut or not.
BINGO!

There are other options available:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/tidal-power-haida-gwaii-1.3717132
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...tric-nova-scotia-energy-electricity-1.3607043
http://wavestarenergy.com/sites/def...nts_of_Wave_Energy_Utilization_in_Denmark.pdf
http://nautil.us/issue/30/identity/blowing-off-the-grid
 
Last edited:
The article is the discussion.
Why they are not looking at alternatives is interesting.
Why they continue to go down this path, is interesting.

B.C.has no need for additional power. That is all about private companies making money from you the tax payer.
 
Here is another example!


Tidal turbines can be put in Bay of Fundy, at least for now

Nova Scotia Supreme Court Justice Jamie Campbell rules against Bay of Fundy Inshore Fishermen's Association
ns-tidal-power-20160519.jpg

A Nova Scotia Supreme Court judge has ruled two turbines can be installed in the Minas Passage, at least until February. (Andrew Vaughan/The Canadian Press)
Bay of Fundy fishermen have failed in their bid to stop the deployment of electricity-generating tidal turbines in the Minas Basin near Parrsboro, N.S.

In a ruling released today, Justice Jamie Campbell of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court said there is no evidence to suggest irreparable harm will be caused by putting the turbines in the water from now until next February. That's when the court is scheduled to hear an appeal of the government's decision to permit the deployment of the turbines.

The Bay of Fundy Inshore Fishermen's Association went to court last week to try to get an injunction to stop Cape Sharp Tidal Ventures from putting two test turbines in the water.

The fishermen relied on reports from two experts who voiced concerns about the lack of "baseline data" to measure conditions in the Minas Basin before the turbines are deployed. Cape Sharp countered with its own expert, who said there is no evidence permanent damage would be caused by the turbines.

Not 'a rolling of the dice'
Campbell said the fishermen have legitimate concerns.

"The concern about the environment in the Bay of Fundy has to be taken very seriously," he wrote. "The potential implications of getting this wrong are massive."

But the judge also noted there was nothing to suggest that having the turbines in the water for the next four months would have a lasting impact.

"There was nothing cavalier about the approach that was used," Campbell wrote. "Scientists may differ on the proper approach to testing but this was not in any sense a rolling of the dice."

This afternoon, a Cape Sharp Tidal spokesperson told CBC News that a date for deploying the turbines has not been finalized but final preparations are underway.
 
The article is the discussion.
Why they are not looking at alternatives is interesting.
Why they continue to go down this path, is interesting.

B.C.has no need for additional power. That is all about private companies making money from you the tax payer.

Perhaps if you wanted to have a discussion on the article then your choice of the title of the thread should have been different. You seem to have pre-judged it at the the start with "Because some fool will think this is a good ideal in B.C." By implication then anyone that disagree's is in your mind a fool and that is no way to start. Does it make sense now when I asked " Tell us OBD is there any form of renewable energy that you find acceptable?"
 
If I remember correctly Pearson College experimented with a turbine off Race Rocks.
 
They just installed one this summer at the fishing lodge I guide out of, it spins at somthing like 12 rpm so there is no hazard to wildlife.
 
I guess if one looks hard enough one can find evidence of negative impact from many of these renewable energy sources, but I think it all needs to be put into context of the much broader issue of what really has the most negative impact and what's at stake if we keep going the way we are. Of course we would want to limit any negative impact that these tidal power generators have on fish and wildlife. I feel technology on that front is only going to get better. Rather it go into making better renewable power sources than better ways to burn coal. However, to respond to these incidents by saying no way when on the other hand you have a possible resurgence in "clean coal" (lol) and a new EPA director pick who rejects climate science, who is fossil fuel friendly and who is posed to repeal many of Obama's environmental initiatives then what really is the biggest, most immediate threat? Are isolated incidents of fish and wildlife being injured in turbines worse than a 3 deg C increase in global temperatures, longer and more severe droughts and storms, and rising sea levels. What would be more of a threat to wild salmon - tidal turbines or a warmer ocean or Fraser River? That's my opinion.
 
..Of course we would want to limit any negative impact that these tidal power generators have on fish and wildlife. I feel technology on that front is only going to get better...
They are in the midst of that. Planned and current research activities outlined in: http://bofep.org/wpbofep/wp-content/proceedings/BoFEP8thproceedings.pdf

Project documents at: http://www.novascotia.ca/nse/ea/minas.passage.tidal.demonstration.asp

Appendix 9 is particularly relevant: http://www.novascotia.ca/nse/ea/minas.passage.tidal.demonstration/Minas_EA_Vol_II_Appendix.09.pdf
 
Last edited:
Back
Top