« 8/26/09 Wind turbines, the village of Freisland, and the fate of local control | Main | 8/19/09 On the Radio: A doctor speaks about his ongoing study of wind farm residents »

8/22/09 Wisconsin wind farm residents VS. wind developer: Whose word will you believe?

Today's Turbines in the News Post: What do Wisconsin wind farm residents and Austrailian wind farm residents have in common? CLICK HERE to read about the noise heard 'round the world.

For the last several weeks we've been focussing on the setbacks and noise limits proposed for the Glacier Hills Wind Farm. To learn more about it, and see more detailed maps of the proposal, CLICK HERE

The PSC is now taking public comment on the proposal, and we hope you'll take a moment to contact them to let them know what you think about the 1000 foot setbacks proposed for this project, and urge them to base the siting of wind turbines on the most recent scientific and medical data rather than the wind developers need to site as many turbines as possible in the smallest amount of space.

You can post your comment to the PSC by CLICKING HERE

You can also view the entire docket for the Glacier Hills Project at the PSC website [CLICK HERE]

Enter docket number 6630-CE-302 in the boxes and click "GO"

Scroll down to read selected public comments from this project. We will be adding them as they become available.


Filed 8/17/09

From Gary Steinich

Cambria, Wisconsin

WE Energies has repeatedly stated there are no resident complaints or problems in the Blue Sky project.

On Saturday Aug. 15th, myself and several others met with a group of local residents, and toured several turbine sites. This by the way was my 11th trip to area wind projects.

A) Issues raised by residents of Blue Sky:

1. Complete lack of trust of WE Energies, have not followed through with issues brought up by residents.

2. Residents have formed a committee and retained an attorney to try to get issues resolved.

3. TV and radio reception is poor or does not exist. They question if their weather radios will work.

4. At night as air cools and becomes more dense, noise levels dramatically increase.

5. Winter weather impacts noise levels as temperature decreases, noise levels increase.

6. We Energies had stated in JDA that noise levels would not exceed 50dBa, yet the JDA wording was changed to read 50dBa on average.

7. We Energies have subcontracted inferior contractors to address TV and radio problems.

8. Service by Flight for Life has many issues for landing in or near a wind project. Will not land at night.

9. Residents will send us all documentation on issues and responses from WE Energies and the PSC.

10. No jobs have been created for local area.

11. Residents have found that realtors do not want to list properties within project area.

12.Residents complain utility rates have increased by 35%

B) Farmer complaints of turbine placement in corn and soybean fields.

1. Noticeable difference of soil around towers and beyond.

2. Soil and area ground was not returned to proper grade after construction.

3. Soil erosion problems after construction.

4. Lack of security at turbine sites, drinking parties are occurring by trash evidence left at sites.

5. Lack of weed control at turbine sites.

C) Noted by all present at tour.

1. Noise, similar to a jet flying over, can be heard at 1000ft. above all other daytime sounds.

2. Noise increased after turbine stopped, changed direction, and restarted after wind direction change.

3. Farmer stated that this noise is nothing compared to what night-time noise is heard.

4. Noise wakes his family usually about 1;00 am at night.

5. Shadow flicker very noticeable entire 2 hrs present at farm. Some of us became dizzy experiencing shadow flicker across field. Stated by farmer, morning and evening are much worse, shadows much longer disruptive, and more intense, especially in winter months.

6. All agreed longer setbacks than 1000ft. would help problems. Turbines at 1/2 mi. or more would eliminate a lot of noise and flicker effects.

If this is what residents of Glacier Hills are to experience in the future, SETBACKS NEED TO BE INCREASED TO AT LEAST 2600ft.

Detail of proposed Glacier Hills Project. Yellow circles indicate 1000 foot setback from non-participating homes. Red dots indicate turbine locations.

Public Comment filed by Jim Bembinster

Town of Union (Rock County)



The PSC continues to allow the noise maker to provide the noise study.

Hessler Associates Inc provided the sound study for this project.

The results of the testing done by this company have recently been challenged by another Engineer for a project in Cape Vincent.

The new study was done by Paul D. Schomer of Schomer & Associates Inc, Champaign IL. Mr. Schomer is Chairman of the International Organization for Standardization working group on environmental noise and chairman of the American National Standards committee on noise, among other leadership roles in noise measurement.

He concludes that Hessler is elevating the background sound levels in his reports. Or could it be that Mr. Hessler is being told what and where to measure by the wind developer? The PSC must take control of the pre-construction and post-construction sound studies to protect the health of Wisconsin citizens.

The quiet hours of the night when people sleep must be protected. The wind industry continues to expect preferential treatment when it comes to making noise. Other noise makers are forced to accept restrictions.

Quarries and pits are subject to hours and days of operation.

Many Cities have signs posted as you enter NO JAKE BRAKES.

In Madison the trains are not allowed to blow their whistles.

Many communities have restrictions on dog barking etc.

The 50dBA average being allowed in the joint development agreements by the PSC is outrageous. In most rural areas this will raise the noise level by a factor of 5. The promise from wind developers of large revenues and no problems with noise makes Town Chairman easy prey.

The low frequency noise produced by industrial wind turbines is not attenuated by the wood frame construction typical of most home walls. Low frequency noise travels further with less loss if intensity than higher frequency sounds.

The PSC should mandate a sound limit of 5dB over background measured as L90 during the nighttime hours from 10:00PM to 6:00AM.

Any turbine that can not comply with that sound limit should be shut down during the nighttime hours.

Thank you for your consideration

Posted on Saturday, August 22, 2009 at 02:34PM by Registered CommenterThe BPRC Research Nerd | Comments Off

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend