6/9/11 Problem? What problem? AND Things that go THUMP THUMP THUMP in the night AND Big Wind spends big money to strong arm little Minnesota towns AND Wind Industry knows it is killing Golden Eagles, Red Tail Hawks, Kestrals and more birds and also bats and still tries to pass as "green"
From Australia
HEALTH REVIEW PROMISED INTO WIND FARMS
READ ENTIRE STORY AT THE SOURCE www.abc.net.au
June 9 2011
By Sarina Locker
“I’m standing here because there is a problem,” Ms Bernie Janssen told the seminar. Ms Janssen says she didn’t object to the wind farm at Waubra, in Victoria in 2009, until she began feeling unwell.
“In May-June 2009 I woke in the night with rapid heartbeat, shortness of breath. I didn’t associate it then with wind turbines. In July, my GP noticed that my blood pressure was elevated.” She says she’s also felt body vibration, hypertension, tinitus, cognitive depression, sleep disruption, ear and head pressure.
She found out 37 people living up to 4km away from turbines began experiencing symptoms at about the same time.
The NHMRC’s hearing comes just one week before the Senate Inquiry in the impacts of windfarms is tabled in Parliament.
Many studies on so called wind turbine syndrome have been based on interviewing sufferers.But a Portugese environmental scientist is studying the physical effects of low frequency noise on the body. Dr Mariana Alves-Pereira of Lusofona University in Portugal has been studying vibroacoustics.
“We assess the effects of noise based on medical tests, so they’re objective medical tests. If we go in what we’ll do is get echo-cardiograms, we’ll do brain studies.”
Dr Alves Pereira has degrees in physics, biomedical engineering and a phD environmental science. She bases her research on her earlier work on aircraft workers, dating back to the 1980s who’ve been exposed to high levels of noise, up to 200Hz. “Noise in the aeronautical industry is very rich in low frequency components,” she says.
She found a specific set of symptoms associated with people exposed to low frequency noise, but says these levels are much lower than the levels of low frequency noise in houses near windfarms. She says they studied one family and their horses near a windfarm, and the biological response of their tissues which she says relates to exposure to low frequency noise.
UK based noise and vibration consultant Dr Geoff Leventhall says the media has been running scare stories about infrasound since the 1970s. He cites NASA’s research with Apollo space program found no impact.“The sort of energy exposure from the NASA work over 24 years would take a few thousand years to get from wind farms at the low levels that they have.”
He rejects the theory of a direct physiological effect of infrasound, he says it’s an assumption. He says what annoys people is the audible swish of the blades not infrasound.
Renowned anti-smoking campaigner, public health Professor Dr Simon Chapman has entered the debate and says it’s a noisy minority who say they suffer from the noise. Dr Chapman argues compensation from wind turbines situated on your farm could be the antitode. “People who move to the country, often will feel don’t want their environment disturbed.. and they’re annoyed to see wind farms unless they’re benefitting economically from them.”
He doesn’t see the need for more research, because it might hold up development of wind power. Despite the scepticism, Australia’s peak body supporting health research the NHMRC will conduct another review of the evidence over the next 12 months.
From Massachusetts
TURBINE TALK: NEW STATE PANEL TO STUDY HEALTH EFFECTS
READ THE ENTIRE STORY AT THE SOURCE: FALMOUTH BULLETIN, www.wickedlocal.com
June 8 2011
By Craig Salters
Terri Drummey told the crowd that her son refuses to sleep in his bed because of the “thumping” and was having problems at school until the turbine was curtailed.
Falmouth selectmen organized a Monday night forum to discuss the issue of wind turbines and received a standing-room-only crowd of state and local officials, expert consultants and mostly angry residents.
Discussions of noise, low frequency noise, shadow flicker, proper setback distances and possible health effects from the turbines dominated during the more than three-hour meeting.
The final portion of the meeting was reserved for the comments of abutters to the town’s Wind 1 turbine at the Falmouth Wastewater Treatment Facility. Those residents shared stories of sleepless nights, headaches and other ill effects they say are brought on by the turbine.
Regardless of this or that study, they told the board, there is a problem with the nearly 400-foot, 1.65-megawatt turbine, which has been operational for more than a year but is now curtailed during strong winds in a nod to residents.
“Clearly there is a problem. We are not complaining just to complain,” Blacksmith Shop Road resident Dick Nugent told selectmen after pointing to the packed auditorium at the Morse Pond School. “We don’t expect you to have all the answers but we do expect you to take it and run with it.”
The entire auditorium received a bit of news early in the meeting when Steven Clarke, assistant secretary at the state’s Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, announced that a panel will be formed this week to specifically study any health effects regarding the sounds from wind turbines. That panel will be comprised of representatives of the state’s Department of Environmental Protection and its Department of Public Health.
“Right now, the focus is on sound,” Clarke told the audience.
Regarding possible health effects, Gail Harkness, chairwoman of the Falmouth Board of Health, said that board has been meeting with concerned residents for the past year and now receives bi-weekly updates at its regular meetings She said reported health effects include sleep disturbances, fatigue, headaches and nausea. The board has created a database of information on the issue and has also developed a wind turbine complaint and/or comment form which will be available online.
Patricia Kerfoot, chairwoman of the planning board, lauded the town for its decision to have a one-year moratorium on new wind turbine projects while more information is collected and regulations are formulated. “First and foremost, the planning board is here to listen,” Kerfoot said.
Kerfoot and others had plenty to listen to. There was Chris Menge of Harris Miller Miller & Hanson, the project manager of a noise study on the Wind 1 turbine. He discussed the results of the analysis including additional clarifications requested by the state. According to Menge, Wind 1 did not exceed noise limits but there would be trouble between midnight and 4 a.m. after Wind 2 goes into service. He recommended shutting down one of those turbines at low wind speeds during those hours.
But there was also Todd Drummey, an abutter, who used data available from the studies to point to different conclusions. Drummey said Menge’s claim that the turbine is less intrusive at high wind speeds is contrary to the experience of residents.
“The wind turbine is annoying at low speeds,” Drummey said. “It’s intolerable at high speeds. It drives people out of their homes.”
Drummey was joined by Mike Bahtiarian of Noise Control Engineering, a consultant hired by the resident group. His major point was that amplitude modulation, or what he called “the swishing” of the turbines, needs to be considered.
Stephen Wiehe, a representative of Weston & Samson, discussed the financial aspects of the municipal turbines while Thomas Mills and Susan Innis, both of Vestas, discussed the mechanical details of the turbine itself.
Malcolm Donald, an abutter from Ambleside Drive, discussed the concerns of turbine malfunction and the potential of ice being thrown from the blades. However, probably his most compelling testimony concerned “shadow flicker,” which is the rhythmic flashing of sunlight and shadow caused by the spinning blades. He showed the audience a video shot from inside his house where, looking through the window, the shadow of the blades can be seen moving repeatedly across his lawn.
“The inside of the house looks like a disco in the morning,” he said.
Terri Drummey told the crowd that her son refuses to sleep in his bed because of the “thumping” and was having problems at school until the turbine was curtailed.
“He’s happily brought his C’s and D’s up to A’s and B’s within days,” said Drummey. “Let me repeat that: within days.”
Falmouth selectmen have scheduled a July 11 meeting to follow up on further discussion of the turbines.
Selectmen Chairwoman Mary Pat Flynn thanked everyone for attending the forum but singled out residents for sharing their experiences.
“Certainly they were very personal and right to the point,” she said.
READ MORE ON FALMOUTH TURBINES BY CLICKING HERE: falmouth.patch.com
"Terri Drummey referred to the turbine issues as “the so-called Falmouth Effect,” and described the difficulty sleeping and concentrating which she said had led to her 10-year-old son’s declining grades, as well as her daughter’s headaches, and the ringing in her husband’s ears.
“We are the unwilling guinea pigs in your experiment with wind energy,” she said.
WIND GROUPS SPEND BIG ON LOBBYING
READ ENTIRE STORY AT THE SOURCE: The Post-Bulletin, www.postbulletin.com
June 8, 2011
By Heather J. Carlson,
ST. PAUL — Two wind companies with plans to build wind farm projects in Goodhue County shelled out $480,000 in lobbying expenditures in 2010, according to a new report.
AWA Goodhue, which has proposed a 78-megawatt project, spent $380,000 on lobbying. That company ranked 17th highest when it came to lobbying expenditures in 2010, according to the report released by the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board. Geronimo Wind, which is also looking at installing turbines in Goodhue County, spent $100,000.
Zumbrota Township resident Kristi Rosenquist, who opposes the wind project, said she was “shocked” when she saw how much AWA Goodhue spent on lobbying.
Who spent what
AWA Goodhue, $380,000
Geronimo Wind, $100,000
EnXco, $40,000
Juhl Wind, $40,000
Minnesota Wind Coalition, $40,000
Lake Country Wind, $20,000
Renewable Energy Group, $20,000
Windustry, $8,500
Total: $648,500
Source: 2010 Lobbying Disbursement Summary, Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board