Following is the third and final part of a letter adapted from one sent to the Office of Ombudsman of Ontario, on November 28, 2016, by Sherri Lange, CEO North American Platform Against Wind Power (NA-PAW). This part concerns the exploitative character of industrial wind. The first part of this letter was published on Wednesday, December 7, and the second part on Thursday, December 8.

The definition of “exploitation” is “to take advantage of (a person, situation, etc.) especially unethically or unjustly for one’s own ends.” In every sense, the wind industry in Ontario has taken advantage of the Green Energy Act’s pervasive powers to subvert, for its own ends, every protection of our citizens’ health and the environment

Having focused earlier on the health effects of industrial wind, we wish to impress upon you, more briefly, its impacts also on the environment, the economy, communities, property values, and water.…

“Trump’s energy policies are my energy policies. Mission accomplished.”

 – Marita Noon, “My Work Here Is Finished,” November 14, 2016.

Marita Noon has been a talented voice in the energy debate during what will be remembered as a particularly dark era. She began by surviving New Mexico’s Governor Bill Richardson and outlasted Barack Obama at the end.

Interestingly, Marita started from scratch and learned all about energy at a time when there were very few of us working full time from a free market perspective. As a newcomer, she weighted the arguments on their merits and constantly asked: What is energy, why is it important, and why do citizens and voters care about energy?

Marita’s high energy level was something to behold–as in ‘turning your umbrella inside out’.  She spoke to common men and women throughout the industry at conferences, in print, and on the air.…

“Cutting production in 2016 is much more dangerous to OPEC ‘s market share than the Arab Embargo of 1973. …. Today, the United States has massive reserves of oil and gas that will be, not might be, produced at the right price point.”

On October 17, 1973, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries agreed to a five percent production cut from the previous month’s levels. They intended this strategy not solely for increasing their oil revenue but to punish the United States for its support of Israel in the Yom Kippur War. This production cut increased the price of oil dramatically and led to oil discoveries around the world including massive plays in Alaska, Mexico, and the North Sea.

Those three regions alone added approximately 6 million bbls/day to the world oil supply in the next seven years following the embargo.…

“So why did nations from Australia to Europe and states such as California adopt an ineffectual bureaucratic cap-and-trade system? In a word: bribes.”

– James Hansen, “Washington [State] can Lead: Unwashed Version,” October 26, 2016.

“In every country and state where I have tried to make the case for a simple, honest carbon fee-and-dividend the politicians respond that they want part of the money to spend on ‘this and that’ ….”

– James Hansen, “Carbon Pricing: A Useful Cautionary Tale.” October 28, 2016.

The civil war in the environmental community, already evident in the debate over the future of nuclear power, also exists in climate policy between carbon taxation and cap-and-trade. MasterResource has published numerous posts summarizing the views of climate scientist James Hansen, and intellectual leader of CitizensClimateLobby.org…