Better Plan, Wisconsin

Is this St. Croix County's Future? Fond du Lac County home in the Invenergy wind projectLOCAL COMMUNITES COMING [TOGETHER] AGAINST WIND FARMS

SOURCE: New Richmond News, Pierce County Herald www.piercecountyherald.com

February 24, 2011 By: Chris Hamble - Hudson Star-Observer and Jeff Holmquist -

The question of wind turbine location has roiled communities in St. Croix County. The township board of Forest was recently recalled in the Feb. 15 election and the Town of Troy has passed a moratorium on wind farm development.

At its board meeting Thursday, Feb. 10, the town of Troy passed a resolution putting a temporary moratorium in place for the development of wind-energy turbines in and around the town.

A four-man committee was organized by town chair Ray Knapp to look into the “what and how” of possible turbine energy generators and to make an ordinance for the town regarding the building, regulation and usage of possible turbines in the future.

Currently, there is talk at the state capital that the new administration is looking to make strict regulations and standards regarding wind turbine usage, visibility and setbacks. According to Knapp, in a situation such as this, the town may not be “more strict” with its regulations than the state.

Since the state has yet to fully develop a plan, it was suggested that the town issue a moratorium on the building of wind turbines, even though there is currently no plan to build any. The board hopes to keep prospectors and developers from looking into the possibility of constructing turbines until the town can get a hard ordinance on the books. This move was also suggested by the Wisconsin Towns Association.

The moratorium unanimously passed, and is effective until Sept. 26.

“This temporary stay in wind permits will give us time to come up with something right for the town,” said Knapp.

In addition to the moratorium, Knapp also reported that under the current project timeline, the committee would like to draft a possible town ordinance by the regularly scheduled July board meeting, and also compile a list of possible sites for developers to inspect.

_________________________________________________________

The ongoing wind farm controversy has blown the sitting Town of Forest board out of office.

A recall election on Tuesday, Feb. 15, held in conjunction with the Wisconsin primary, went to the three challengers in the contest.

For the chairman position, Jamie Junker gathered 194 votes and incumbent Roger Swanepoel had 123 votes.

For the position of supervisor, challengers Rick Steinberger (207 votes) and Patrick Scepurek (185 votes) were elected. Incumbents Carlton Cress (123 votes) and Douglas Karau (113 votes) were voted out of office.

The recall election was the result of a group of Town of Forest residents who circulated a petition to remove the current board. The petition included the signatures of 93 town residents. A total of 50 signatures was required for a recall election to be conducted.

The group’s main issue with the current board was their approval of a wind project proposed by Emerging Energies LLC, which calls for some 39 turbines to be installed on parcels scattered throughout the township.

Opponents of the plan claim the proposal was approved without appropriate notice and participation from the public.

“The recall election pretty much speaks for itself,” said Junker following his successful run for the chairman post. “The Forest residents have concluded through simply reading a vast number of documents that a number of legal irregularities have taken place. These irregularities are easily understood by anyone that took the time to read the public documents to know what happened in Forest. With great confidence that they had the legal proof, the residents of Forest moved for the rare recall of its officials from office, and to nobody’s surprise they won.”

Junker said the town residents “were never told of the project details until the evening the agreement was actually approved, never knowing of the placement, size, or number at any point during what has repeatedly been said was a public process.”

The towns’ plan commission was also never publicly told of the details, Junker said, yet the formal agreement says the plan commission recommended the agreement.

“Clearly the residents of Forest feel that the previous town board, proven through the records, tried to pull the wool over the residents’ eyes and we’re finding out it didn’t work,” he said.

Junker pledged that the new town board will do “everything legally possible” to stop the wind turbine project now that they’re in office.

He said the chances of the project being stopped are good.

In a phone interview, Steinberger said he was pleased with the results of the recall.

“It was just what I had hoped for,” he said.

Steinberger said he is ready to take on the job of town supervisor and he promised to “represent the people.”

“I want to keep the process open and honest,” he said.

Scepurek was pleased with the outcome as well.

“The citizens of the township decided enough is enough,” he said.

He noted that almost all of the registered voters in the town cast a ballot in the recall, which was an encouraging sign.

“People are waking up and taking notice,” Scepurek said. “People have to start being informed and make sure that things don’t happen under the radar.”

Outgoing supervisor Cress said he didn’t have much to say in the wake of his recall, other than to say he was frustrated by the single-issue focus of the campaign to kick the board out.

“It was unfortunate that it came down to a wind turbine issue and not what it takes to run a township,” he said.

Swanepoel and Karau did not return phone calls to get their reaction to the results of the election.



Bill Rakocy, founder of Emerging Energies, is named in the lawsuitFOREST RESIDENTS FILE SUIT AGAINST TOWN OFFICIALS

SOURCE: New Richmond News, www.newrichmond-news.com

February 17, 2011

By Kevin Murphy,

Three Town of Forest Board supervisors subject to a recall election are defendants in a federal lawsuit alleging their secret agreement of a wind farm developer violated some property owners’ constitutional rights.

According to the suit filed Feb. 9 in Madison:

A group of town residents calling themselves “Forest Voice” alleged board supervisors Roger Swanepoel, Douglas Karau and Carl Cress approved an agreement with Emerging Energies of Wisconsin in April 2008 without notifying affected property owners or holding a public hearing.

In the plan, not announced publically until Aug. 12, 2010, EE sought town approval to construct 39 wind towers of up to 500 feet tall. According to “Forest Voice,” EE’s turbines would create noise and “shadow flicker” up to one-half mile away when operating, diminishing the value of use of the affected properties.

Swanepoel, Karau and Cress also had a conflict of interest in representing the town because each of them or a family member could obtain annual financial payments from EE because they would host or were considering hosting a wind turbine on their property, the lawsuit alleges.

Calls to Swanepoel’s and Karau’s residences Monday seeking comment on the allegations weren’t returned before deadline. Cress said he had no comment Monday on the suit’s allegations.

The agreement approved in April 2008 with EE was reached through a “walking quorum” of phone calls, e-mails and personal conversations in apparent violation of state open meeting laws, the lawsuit claims. The agreement grants annual payments to property owners including Swanepoel, Karau and Cress, living within one-half mile of a wind turbine.

While the agreement creates a “financially favored” class of persons within the town who would benefit from annual payments, it also creates a “financially disfavored” class in terms of safety, quality of life, use of property and property values, the lawsuit claims. Those residents would all be adversely affected by EE’s proposed wind energy project, “Forest Voice” members claim.

Alleged “financially disfavored” residents include:

• Property owners not selected by EE to host a wind turbine but living within one-half mile of one owned by another individual:

• Persons living more than one-half mile from a proposed wind turbine location:

• Persons owning non-occupied residents within one-half mile of a turbine:

• Those living within one-half mile of a turbine who opposed the wind energy project.

“Forest Voice” members including Judi Beestman, Bill Dyer, Jeff Erickson, Scott Voeltz and Brenda and Robert Salseg, are town residents opposed to the EE project on safety and quality of life issues. The board failed to tell the Salsegs about the proposed agreement when approving the Salseg’s request for a trailer home on property within one-quarter mile of a proposed turbine.

The “Forest Voice” residents aren’t eligible for annual payments under the agreement because either the property they own isn’t within one-half mile of a proposed turbine or their property is within a half-mile of a turbine on land owned by someone else.

This “differential selective treatment” of residents in the 2008 agreement is not only “patently arbitrary and irrationally discriminatory, with no rational relationship to any legitimate governmental purpose,” according to the suit, it’s also designed to financially reward participating property owners including Swanepoel, Cress and Karau or their families.

By 2010, the town’s attorney became concerned about the conflict of interest Cress and Swanepoel created by signing the agreement, especially Swanepoel, according to the suit. To disguise and remedy Swanepoel’s conflict, the suit alleges, attorneys for the town and EE and EE co-founder, William Rakocy, devised an illegal “walking quorum” which violated open meeting laws but where the town board would adopt a new agreement without Swanepoel voting.

The 2010 agreement was also developed though secret negotiations between board members and EE and approved without holding a public hearing, “Forest Voice” alleges.

The agreement creates annual payments of $4,000 per megawatt, up to 50 megawatts, to be divided equally among the town, St. Croix County and each property owner of an occupied residence within one-half mile of turbine on their property.

Calls to the attorney for Forest Voice wasn’t returned before deadline.

Attempts to contact Rakocy on Monday weren’t succesful.

The suit claims the board’s approving the 2008 and 2010 agreements without holding a public hearing and completed for their financial reward violated the due process and equal protection rights of the members of “Forest Voice.”

The suit seeks unspecified damages from the town, the three board members and EE.

The suit also seeks a permanent injuction against constructing the EE wind energy project.



Wind turbines tower above a Wisconsin farm

EXPERT WARNS 'PROVINCE OUGHT NOT TO PROCEED' WITH INDUSTRIAL WIND TURBINES

SOURCE: The Windsor Star, www.windsorstar.com

February 17, 2011

By Gary Rennie,

CHATHAM-KENT, Ont. — In a case that’s put Ontario’s Green Energy Act on trial drawing expert witnesses from around the world, a prominent Canadian physician testified Wednesday that construction of new wind turbines should be put on hold until appropriate medical studies are done to ensure the safety of nearby residents.

“The province ought not to proceed with the development of industrial wind turbines any further,” said Dr. Robert McMurtry, a past dean of the medical school at the University of Western Ontario and a former assistant deputy minister of health for the federal government.

“There is a lot of suffering,” McMurtry said. “We need to understand why.”

McMurtry was a witness for Chatham-Kent residents trying to overturn ministry of environment approval for Suncor’s proposed Kent Breeze wind farm.

Using audio and video teleconferencing, expert witnesses from England, New Zealand and the U.S. have already weighed in on the complex science of industrial noise and how humans perceive and react to it.

Suncor and environment ministry lawyers have a long list of experts of their own to call in the weeks ahead. Final arguments to the two-member Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal panel aren’t expected to be made until April.

Considered the key witness for sceptics of the safety of turbines as currently regulated in Ontario, McMurtry spoke of his experiences talking to more than 40 people who have lived close to the 120-metre high towers and whirling blades. They complain of prolonged sleep deprivation, stress, headaches, extreme fatigue, and high blood pressure, he said.

Leaving their homes to stay with relatives or in motels provides relief from the symptoms, McMurtry said. “The only cure is to move.”

McMurtry was critical of both Ontario’s noise standard for wind turbines and the 550 metre setback from turbine locations to homes in the regulations to the 2009 Green Energy Act. “I do not have confidence in those guidelines.”

The setback is a key issue. If setbacks of 1,500 metres or more – which some experts call for – had been established, development of wind turbines in heavily populated Essex County and many other southern Ontario communities would have been impossible.

It’s not just a question of how loud wind turbines may be, it’s the repetitive, pulsating nature of the “whoosh, whoosh” sound that appears to annoy some people, McMurtry said.

An analogy used by other experts in the hearing is the drip of a leaky faucet, which while not loud, can be annoyingly disruptive to sleep.

Low frequency noise and inaudible, infrasound may also contribute to the distress of those living close to turbines, said McMurtry. He conceded a lack of research proving a definitive cause and effect, but at the same time, said no research proving the safety of turbines at typical setbacks exists either.

“More likely than not, people living near industrial wind turbines are suffering adverse health affects,” McMurtry said. Governments should act in precautionary way to protect the health of residents until peer-reviewed research provides greater certainty about the kinds of regulations needed for wind development, he said.

McMurtry got interested in wind turbines after buying a cottage in Prince Edward County in 2007 with enough land to potentially put up one of his own. But after researching the issue further, he became alarmed at the weak scientific basis for claims of the safety of wind turbines.

He tried unsuccessfully to raise his concerns with several Liberal cabinet ministers, getting no response.

Prince Edward County has also been a popular choice of location for several large wind projects although none have yet been built. McMurtry has been prominent in a local citizens’ group in his community questioning wind turbine development.

A past special advisor to a Royal Commission on the Future of Health Care, he has immersed himself in recent years on the scientific research around the world on the health issues raised by wind turbines.



A VALENTINES DAY MESSAGE FROM THE BPWI RESERCH NERD:

IF YOU + RURAL WISCONSIN = TRUE LOVE, WHY NOT BE A SWEETHEART AND GIVE THESE LEGISLATORS A CALL?

Call the numbers or click on the links below to contact members of the joint committee to thank them for holding last weeks hearing on the PSC's wind siting rules and to ask that the rules be suspended. (Read more ...)

Senator Leah Vukmir (Chair) (R- Wauwatosa) 266-2512, Sen.Vukmir@legis.wisconsin.gov
Representative Jim Ott (Chair) (R- Mequon) 266-0486, Rep.OttJ@legis.wisconsin.gov
Senator Joseph Leibham (R- Sheboygan) 266-2056, Sen.Leibham@legis.wisconsin.gov
Senator Glenn Grothman (R-West Bend) 266-7513, Sen.Grothman@legis.wisconsin.gov
Senator Lena Tayor (D-Milwaukee) 266-5810, Sen.Taylor@legis.wisconsin.gov

Senator Fred Risser (D-Madison) 266-1627, Sen.Risser@legis.wisconsin.gov
Representative Dan LeMahieu (R-Cascade) 266-9175, Rep.lemahieu@legis.wisconsin.gov  
Representative Gary Hebl (D-Sun Prairie) 266-7678,  Rep.hebl@legis.wisconsin.gov 
Representative Fred Kessler (D-Milwaukee) 266-5813, Rep.kessler@legis.wisconsin.gov  

Don't forget to include your name and address.

Click on the image above to hear wind turbine noise that includes a whistle. To see a picture of the family living beside these turbines, scroll down. [SOURCE]

CITIZEN GROUP FILES LAWSUIT OVER WIND TURBINE PROJECT

SOURCE: WQOW TV: Eau Claire

Town of Forest (WQOW) - A dispute over wind turbines has now turned into a lawsuit. 

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: Emerging Energies is said to be the wind developer in this project. One of the founders of Emerging Energies is Bill Rakocy, pictured here. Rakocy is on the PSC's wind siting council.

SECOND FEATURE: 

Bill Rakocy's company, Emerging Energies, recently put up 500 foot tall turbines in the Town of Glenmore in Brown County. The Shirley Wind project hosts the tallest wind turbines in the state.

Better Plan recently received this email from Steve Deslauriers, a Brown County resident who recently visited a home in this wind project.

"I was graciously invited to go to a neighbor's home that is within approximately 3400 feet of 3 of the 500 foot tall Shirley Wind turbines (the closest being approximately 2700 feet from their home).  

They can see 6 of the turbines from their home - the farthest being miles away.

 The couple built this home and has lived there for 30 plus years and is now in their mid/upper 60's.  They wanted me to experience the effect the turbines are having on them.  

I drove up their driveway and got out of my car.  I looked around and the presence of the 3 closest turbines are very imposing.  I listened and could hear the thrumming of the blades and the whir of the gearboxes, but the noise I could hear has was not particularly loud - the wind speed this morning was 10mph so a pretty calm day.

I walked up to the door and was invited in the house to see the wife wearing industrial earmuffs in her kitchen which she removed right away when I walked in.  She went to the doctor this week due to ear pain (a new condition) and the earmuffs help - Doctor found nothing physically wrong.

The husband asked me to sit in his rocker and just left me alone for a while.  I heard the whir and whoosh, but it was pretty muffled.

 But here is what is scary to me - as I sat there over the course of 10 minutes or so, I could start feeling pressure in my right ear (facing the window that faced the turbines).  This was not expected.  At first, it was just "weird", but the longer I stayed, the more unsettling it was.

After a while the husband and I walked outside around their home.  As we walked on the side of the home, he stopped and I immediately said to him "I know why you stopped here!".  

It was a strange phenomenon - that place at that moment, I felt the same 'pressure' he did - must be from how the house is situated, wind direction, etc.  

I thought this was very weird so I walked back to the front of the house and came back to that spot a number of times and the same sensation was present each time.  It is hard to describe but there is a difference in pressure that you feel in your head.  The pressure feeling was present in most places, but particularly bad in some.

The longer I stayed at their home the more unsettled I became.  I honestly don't know how else to describe it.  Unsettled is the best way - the physical feeling of pressure in my ears did not go away, and the longer we visited, it felt like pressure was being felt in my temples.

 This is a feeling that my body was telling me was not good, and quite frankly, I did NOT want to stay.  Not because of any lack of hospitality, but the feeling that was in my head was not pleasant at all.  It triggered a flight response in me - I wanted to leave.  This on a day of 10mph winds....

This couple has offered to invite anyone to their house to experience this first hand.  Plan to spending some time there - my body's reaction worsened over time (that is this couples experience as well when they return after being gone a while).  

Bring a magazine or newspaper and sit in the husband's chair.  While I can't say your reaction will be the same, it is worth your time.  Even this couple's reaction to the sound/pressure is different, so sure it will affect each of you in different ways.

This is my first visit of any length inside an affected home and it was eye opening.  The setback and wind speeds were certainly not even close to the worst it could be, and despite that, I wanted OUT! ...  I could not live there.

THIRD FEATURE:

-Wind developer Gary Haltaufderheide speaking to residents in Rock County, Wisconsin regarding concerns about impacts to non-participating landowners:

 In any wind project, "There are always going to to be winners and losers"

BETTER PLAN LOOKS AT SOME OF THE LOSERS:

These are the losers. This family, these children-- now living with noise and shadow flicker  from poorly sited turbines. Read about what has happened to their lives since the turbines went on line by CLICKING HERE to visit their website

MORE LOSERS:

"The retired 61-year-old furniture maker said the turbines give him nausea by aggravating inner-ear and balance problems he’s had since a 1966-67 tour in Vietnam subjected him to the constant pounding of an Army 155-mm artillery piece. I cannot live where I’m living now with these decibels and vibrations,” he said. [SOURCE]

"Builders say they’re quiet, and Meyer said he believed that – until he stepped outside and looked up for the jet flying over. It was the new turbine nearby. Depending on wind and humidity, any of the five turbines within a mile of his house obtrude on the quiet, whining or thumping “like boots in the dryer.” Within weeks, his wife and son started having chronic headaches. His wife now suffers constant ringing in her ears. It vanished on vacation. Meyer no longer sleeps much –" [SOURCE]

"They're just too close to people." Allen Hass, 56, a Malone farmer, told the paper the rent he got for hosting a turbine couldn't make up for headaches. "I wish I never made that deal," he said. [SOURCE]

"Emmett Curley has enjoyed living in the area for 15 years, but says things have become unbearable since the wind turbines arrived a year ago. "Last summer when it started, I left my house. I just couldn't stand it.   I've had friends over that left during the situation, saying, 'I'm starting to get a headache,'" Curley said Friday. The problem comes when the sun sets and its light passes through the turbines, creating a flickering effect of shadow and light. It lasts for about an hour.  I'm lined up with two turbines that give me a double flicker. You can't watch TV, you can't read a book, a newspaper, you can't work on a computer because your eyes are constantly adjusting to light and dark," he said. "Green energy is a great thing, but when it interferes with life, health — no, something has to be done." [SOURCE]

"Obviously, the community has been torn apart because of this project," [Morrison Town Chairman] Christensen said. You have brothers not talking to brothers, fathers and sons not talking. It's sad. … Everybody has all the right to debate (an) opinion with fact, but do it with respect. That hasn't been happening."[SOURCE]

Ms Godfrey said she suffered sleep deprivation, headaches and nausea before moving out in April 2010 when Acciona purchased her property. It was like you had a hat on that’s too tight and you have a pain that just gets worse and worse, and you can’t take it off,” Ms Godfrey said. “There was pain most of the time.” [SOURCE]

"Glenbrae farming couple Carl and Sam Stepnell walked away from their nine-year-old home last week, claiming turbines near their property were making them sick.Mrs Stepnell, 37, said she began to suffer symptoms immediately after turbines were turned on near her house 14 months ago. “I’ve never suffered anything like it before,” she said.“Instant pressure in the ears and in the head, inability to sleep. The trouble is that it is not like a broken arm or leg. You can’t see it. Some nights the noise was unbearable. You cannot relax. You can’t get to sleep.” [SOURCE]

“They told us we wouldn’t hear it, or that it would be masked by the sound of the wind blowing through the trees,” said Sally Wylie, a former schoolteacher down the road from the Lindgrens. “I feel duped.” [SOURCE]

“I’m getting vibrations, and I haven’t slept in I don’t know how long,” Mrs. Garrow said. “But I don’t think anybody’s looking out for our interest.” [SOURCE]

Here, it is not just the constant noise, but the pulsing drone that makes the noise particularly hostile that is so disturbing. It is inescapable. [ SOURCE]

“I had problems with my heart, with my eyes, my digestive system,” Marshall told CTV News. “It traumatizes your whole body.” [SOURCE]

Future Losers:

“While I support the overall [wind] rule because it will promote the development of wind in Wisconsin, the rule fails to provide a much-needed safety net for people whose health declines because of a wind turbine located near their home,”  -PSC Commissioner Lauren Azar [SOURCE]

“It appears for some people that their blood pressure first thing in the morning is elevated if the turbines are going, and is not elevated if the turbine have been off overnight and early in the morning,” Dr Laurie said. Dr Laurie said early-morning blood pressure elevation was a known risk factor for heart attacks."[SOURCE]

“If large-scale wind energy plants would be sited in areas of intense vegetable production, the result could be devastating crop losses,” said Tamas Houlihan of the state Potato and Vegetable Growers Association. [SOURCE]

"...a nearby nursing home called Golden Living Center, based on calculations done by the applicant and the town’s engineer, are expected to experience the light-shadow play of flicker for more than the 30 hours per year the wind industry’s informal standard, noted Samuelson." [SOURCE]

“Bird deaths from wind power are the new inconvenient truth. The total number of birds killed and the amount of bird habitat lost will dramatically increase as wind power build-out continues across the country in a rush to meet federal renewable energy targets,” [SOURCE]

"A real estate agent says many of her customers don't want to live near wind farms, which has caused home values to drop in those areas.Beth Einsele of Beth Einsele Real Estate in Shabbona said she has shown her share of properties near Lee County wind farms. She said the houses there can't sell for as much as similar homes in other areas of the county." [SOURCE]

“We are a hard working young family — my partner has shed blood, sweat and tears to make that property what it is today,” Mr Manning told The Border Watch. She literally cried when she began to comprehend what the wind farm’s impact will have on our future plans, including the future development of our investment, our retirement, in terms of the potential for the property and the personal connection we have with it.” [SOURCE]

 CLICK ON LINKS BELOW TO READ ABOUT MORE WIND PROJECT LOSERS IN THE NEWS

 “Wind farms ‘make people sick who live up to a mile away’”.

 January 25, 2004. Telegraph.

 “Family says turbine vibrations made them ill enough to move”.

 May 13, 2006. Hamilton Spectator.

“Could Wind Turbines Be A Health Hazard?”

  October 12, 2006. WHAM-TV..

 “Quietly sounding alarm; Forced from home after noise from wind farm turbines made family sick, d’Entremont telling others his story”.

August 27, 2007 Chronicle Herald

 “Neighbors claim wind turbine makes them ill”

 July 29, 2008. WFAA-TV. 

 “Wind turbines cause health problems, residents say”.

 September 28, 2008. CTV

“Neighbors at odds over noise from wind turbines”. 

November 3, 2008. USA Today

“Wind farms: Is there a hidden health hazard?”. 

November 14, 2008. KATU-TV

 “NW Missouri man sues Deere, wind energy company”.

February 3, 2009. Associated Press.

 “Something in the Wind as Mystery Illnesses Rise”.

February 6, 2009. Asahi Shimbun.

 “Wind farms: Interview of Malone and Johnsburg residents”.

March 2, 2009. Morning Show, KFIX.

 “Loud as the wind: Wind tower neighbors complain of noise fallout”.

March 8, 2009 East Oregonian.

“Wind Turbines Driving People From Their Homes”.

A-News, CTV

“Wind turbines causing health problems, some Ont. residents say”.

April 14, 2009 CBC Radio One.

 “Noise, Shadows Raise Hurdles For Wind Farms”

April 21, 2009 Wall Street Journal.

 “Reports of wind farm health problems growing”

April 22, 2009 CTV

 “Formal study needed into health effects of wind turbines, doctor says”.

(April 23, 2009). CBC News.

 “Daughter’s Earaches Blamed On Wind Farm”.

A-News, CTV Globe Media.

 “Survey points to health woes arising from wind turbines”.

May 5, 2009 Peter Epp

 “Is public’s health blowing in the wind?”.

May 7, 2009 Western News.

 “Wind turbines blamed for adverse health effects”.

May 13, 2009 The Epoch Times.

 “Does wind turbine noise affect your sleep or health?”

May 15, 2009 WLBZ2.

 “Health can be a key issue when living near wind farm”.

May 23, 2009. Southern Illinoisan.

 “Solutions sought for turbine noise”.

June 4, 2009 Huron Daily Tribune.

 “Wind turbine noise is rattling some residents in Michigan’s Thumb”

June 11, 2009 Bay City Times.

 “Wind Farms Ruining Quality of Life?”.

June 19, 2009 WNEM.

 “St. Columban residents get informed on wind turbine health concerns”.

June 24, 2009. Lucknow Sentinel.

 “Wind turbine noise ‘forces’ couple out”.

 July 15, 2009.A BC News

 “Are wind farms a health risk? US scientist identifies ‘wind turbine syndrome’”.

August 2, 2009. The Independent.

 “Living near a wind farm can cause heart disease, panic attacks and migraines”.

August 2, 2009. Daily Mail

 “Discontent of Mars Hill Residents Leads to Lawsuit Against First Wind”.

August 7, 2009. Maine Public Broadcasting Network.

 “Migraine, Wind Turbine Connection Still Being Examined”.

August 11, 2009. KESQ.

 “Mars Hill windmills prompt civil lawsuit”

.August 12, 2009. Bangor Daily News.

 “Farmers flee as turbines trigger despair”.

August 22, 2009. The Australian.

 “No relief for land owners affected by wind farms”.

August 24, 2009 The Australian.

“Govt urged to probe wind farm illness claims”

August 28, 2009 ABC news

 “Anger over wind turbine noise”.

September 7, 2009 Weekly Times

 “Living near turbines is ‘mental torture’, Carlisle inquiry told”.

October 22, 2009 News & Star.

 “Living by wind farms no breeze, some say”.

November 24, 2009 Detroit Free Press

 “Officials cover up wind farm noise report”.

December 13, 2009 Sunday Times.

 “Wind tower neighbor bought out for health reasons”.

December 30, 2009. Chronicle.

 “Wind turbines: Expert says people are suffering health problems from being too close to structures”.

January 16, 2010. Whig-Standard.

 “Sickness claims prompt study of wind turbines”.

January 16, 2010. Whig-Standard.

 “Claims of wind farm illness”.

 “The Brewing Tempest Over Wind Power”.

March 1, 2010. Wall Street Journal.

. “Wind Farms Causing Health Problems?”.

 March 4, 2010 Fox Business

“Landowners sue Invenergy over Forward Wind Energy Center”.

April 1, 2010. Daily Reporter.

 “Effects of turbines in question”.

April 12, 2010 Concord Monitor.

 “Oakfield couple files PSC complaint over wind farm”.

April 18, 2010. Fond du Lac Reporter.

 “Couple driven out by noisy wind turbines sue ″.

April 19, 2010. Daily Mirror.

 “Wind farm property sells at sheriff’s sale”.

Snyder, Paul May 6, 2010. Daily Reporter.

“Hospital hosts wind debate”

 May 7, 2010. Rutland Herald

 “Another health problem caused by turbines”.

May 26, 2010. Watertown Daily Times

 “Sick residents claim wind farm ‘torture’”

May 27, 2010 Herald Sun.

 “Homeowners File Lawsuit Over Wind Turbines”.

May 28, 2010 WNEM.

 “An ill wind blows in”.

May 29, 2010. The Standard.

 “Falmouth wind-turbine noise has local residents whirling”.

June 2, 2010. Boston Herald

Click on the image above to watch a video slide show of homes in the Fond du Lac County wind projects. The siting guidelines the Public Service Commission used in Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties are much like the siting rules that will take effect on March 1, 2011 unless the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR) decides to suspend the rules and return them to the PSC.

At the hearing, the JCRAR showed themselves to be an unusually attentive group of legislators who appeared genuinely interested in what people at the hearing had to say. They gave particular attention to the stories from the people with homes in the wind projects who are clearly having trouble living with setbacks the PSC setbacks once assumed to be safe.

Click on the links below if you'd like to contact members of the joint committee to thank them for holding the hearing and to ask that they suspend the PSC's rules.

Senator Leah Vukmir (Chair) (R- Wauwatosa) 266-2512, Sen.Vukmir@legis.wisconsin.gov
Representative Jim Ott (Chair) (R- Mequon) 266-0486, Rep.OttJ@legis.wisconsin.gov
Senator Joseph Leibham (R- Sheboygan) 266-2056, Sen.Leibham@legis.wisconsin.gov
Senator Glenn Grothman (R-West Bend) 266-7513, Sen.Grothman@legis.wisconsin.gov
Senator Lena Tayor (D-Milwaukee) 266-5810, Sen.Taylor@legis.wisconsin.gov
Senator Fred Risser (D-Madison) 266-1627, Sen.Risser@legis.wisconsin.gov
Representative Dan LeMahieu (R-Cascade) 266-9175, Rep.lemahieu@legis.wisconsin.gov  
Representative Gary Hebl (D-Sun Prairie) 266-7678,  Rep.hebl@legis.wisconsin.gov 
Representative Fred Kessler (D-Milwaukee) 266-5813, Rep.kessler@legis.wisconsin.gov  

Don't forget to include your name and address.

Click on the image below to see a video made by Larry Wunsch who served on the wind-siting council.

Mr. Wunsch testified to the committee on Wednesday about his first hand experience of living 1100 feet from a wind turbine being marginalized. He said the council wouldn't allow him to play a recording of the wind turbine noise he lives with.

Although Mr. Wunsh made copies of the video below available to council members, it was never discussed.

Posted on YouTube in August of 2008, Larry Wunsch's video has been viewed over 45,000 times.

HUNDREDS JAM HEARING ON WISCONSIN WIND ENERGY RULES

SOURCE: The Associated Press

February 10, 2011

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Hundreds have packed a legislative hearing on how far energy-generating wind turbines should be located from property lines.

Statewide construction standards for turbines are set to go into effect March 1. But Gov. Scott Walker and his fellow Republicans have raised concerns that the regulations would allow turbines to be built too close to a neighbor's property.

Walker proposed a bill with larger setbacks but lawmakers decided not to consider it after critics said the measure would hurt the wind industry. GOP lawmakers instead have chosen to approach the issue through the rule-making process.

Republicans on the rule committee told state regulators they're worried the rules allow turbines to be built so close to property lines neighbors could get hurt.

The committee wasn't expected to take any action on Wednesday.

Couldn't make the wind siting hearing at the capitol on Wednesday? Want to know what happened?

WATCH WISCONSIN EYE'S VIDEO OF WEDNESDAY'S WIND SITING HEARING AT THE CAPITOL BY CLICKING HERE

Want more?

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN to Wednesday's broadcast of Wisconsin Public Radio's Joy Cardin show:  Writer Lynda Barry discusses the hearing and the research she's done on  wind siting issues in our state.

TESTIMONY

To: Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR)

From: Douglas Zweizig, Ph.D., Vice Chair, Wind Siting Council

Re: Clearinghouse Rule #10-057; PSC Wind Siting Rules proposed Chapter 128

Date: February 9, 2011

My name is Douglas Zweizig.

I am a retired UW—Madison professor from the School of Library and Information Studies. I conducted national survey research studies, and I directed doctoral students in the conduct of original research.

I’m also a member of my Town's Plan Commission, and I serve as Vice-Chair of the PSC's Wind Siting Council.

I am here today to request the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules to set aside PSC 128 (CR 10-057).

I am one of the authors of the Wind Siting Council’s minority report to the Public Service Commission. (See Appendix E of http://psc.wi.gov/mediaRoom/documents/WSC%20Final%20Report%20and%20Cover%20Letter%208-9-2010.pdf)

That minority report details grave concerns about the basis for the wind siting rules that are before us today. I am here to request that the rules be suspended because they were produced without a thorough or responsible audit of the negative impacts of industrial-scale wind turbines.

The rules as written will not protect the health, safety and welfare of impacted Wisconsin residents and communities. As you may know, the majority of the Wind Siting Council members had a direct or indirect financial interest in pushing for rules that favored the wind industry.

The rules reflect this, resulting in setbacks that are too short, limits on noise and shadow flicker that are too lax, and nearly non-existent remedies for citizens with complaints.

In Act 40, the legislature required an independent and qualified researcher "with expertise regarding the health impacts of wind energy systems" to be a member of the Wind Siting Council.

 Instead, the Public Service Commission appointed a junior physician staff member of the state Division of Public Health who was just out of medical school. He openly and publicly admitted he had no expertise in the issue of health effects and wind turbines. He had collected no data and had made no observations himself on the health effects of wind energy systems.

His research consisted of reviewing existing literature using very narrow criteria. This resulted in a whitewashed report to the Council which ignored not only the first-hand experience of Wisconsin residents who are clearly having trouble living with wind turbines, but also disregarded even the most basic recommendations of the World Health Organization on nighttime noise limits necessary for healthful sleep. (www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/43316/E92845.pdf)

The most common health complaint from wind project residents is not mysterious: turbine vibration and noise interrupts their sleep. Health problems associated with chronic sleep deprivation from nighttime noise are well known. The PSC should be directed to carry out the quality of study called for in Act 40.

The main argument against more protective guidelines is an economic one. Wind energy proponents tell you the very setbacks that will protect the health of Wisconsin residents are “job killers.” You have been told over and over that wind energy systems will create jobs and provide a clean, effective source of energy with no negative consequences.

Of course, we are all interested in increased jobs for Wisconsin, but those who claim that short setbacks will not only do no harm but will also result in over 7,000 wind-related jobs in our state should be required to prove it, not just claim it.

The MacIver Institute recently attempted to document Wisconsin jobs related to wind energy and were able to identify only 31 jobs that were specifically tied to wind energy-related products. (http://maciverinstitute.com/2010/08/facts-about-green-job-creation-elusive-as-the-wind/) What’s the truth here? Shouldn’t we know?

In the name of questionable job creation, you are asked to accept siting rules that clearly disregard negative impacts to human health, wildlife, and property values in order to promote unsubstantiated claims of improved air quality and job growth.

If the PSC is to create wind siting rules for the entire state, then provisions for accountability must be part of those rules.

The rules must ensure the following things: that wind development does no harm to people, property values, wildlife, or habitat; that it provides an economical power source; and that it reduces output from coal-fired power plants in our state. 

As Vice-Chairman of the Wind Siting Council, I am here to say the rules as put forth by the PSC do not meet these requirements and to ask that you suspend them.

I would be glad to answer any questions you may have.

Douglas Zweizig

Evansville, WI 

Town of Union (Rock County) Plan Commission

SECOND FEATURE: LET'S REVIEW:

LEADING EXPERTS POOL MOST RECENT UNDERSTANDING OF HARM OF INDUSTRIAL WIND TURBINES ON HUMAN HEALTH

SOURCE: Wellington Times, wellingtontimes.ca

Evidence was presented that people likely don’t “get used to” wind turbine noise. Even those who claim not to hear noise appear to endure physiological stress related to the pulsating low frequency noise.

Among the more worrisome bits of information gleaned from the weekend conference was that current assumptions of safe setbacks are likely wrong.

November 5 2010

by Rick Conroy,

Piece by piece, presentation by presentation, the foundation upon which industrial wind industry and much of Ontario’s Green Energy Act sits was taken apart and dismantled this past weekend.

The industrial wind turbine business was always on shaky ground. It has been promoted by governments eager to be seen to be doing something about the western world’s reliance on fossil fuels—oil, gas and coal. In many respects wind energy policy has been a public relations exercise fuelled by governments’ willingness to spill billions of taxpayer dollars into developer’s pockets.

They do so with a mix of wishful thinking and willful blindness in the expectation that technology leaps will fill in the significant operational gaps before most folks realize intermittent generating sources don’t work on a large scale.

None of these folks anticipated, however, that industrial wind turbines would actually make people sick. After the first international symposium in Picton on the weekend, there can be little doubt remaining.

Several analogies were made about how the fight against the harmful effects of smoking tobacco began with just a few voices in the medical and scientific community. It would take decades, however, before governments would listen and begin to take action. The esteemed participants of the Picton gathering fervently hope it doesn’t take as long for governments and the broader public to understand the harm caused by industrial wind turbines.

Dr. Bob McMurtry, a physician and former deputy minister of health in Ontario, gathered doctors, scientists and researchers from around the world to Picton in reveal their findings and share the latest information on the impact of industrial wind turbines in what he termed a “consilience” or unity of knowledge.

WHAT WE LEARNED

Several alarming messages emerged. Every animal with a functioning hearing organ, including humans, is at risk of being affected by the low-frequency pulsating sound emitted by industrial wind turbines.

Those most acutely affected tend to be disposed to motion sickness or car sickness— but even those without these symptoms may be responding to the noise, whether they are aware of it or not.

The low-frequency and subsonic (below the hearing range) noise from wind turbines has a demonstrable effect on the ear and hearing mechanisms. The most acute symptoms include nausea, dizziness and sleep disturbance. It is now becoming evident, however, that even those who don’t suffer these particular symptoms are likely realizing some harm.

These hearing mechanisms are closely related to language development, learning and cognitive organization— as the fine components of the ear become stressed, learning in children becomes impaired, concentration becomes harder for adults, and sleep is disrupted.

Evidence was presented that people likely don’t “get used to” wind turbine noise. Even those who claim not to hear noise appear to endure physiological stress related to the pulsating low frequency noise.

Among the more worrisome bits of information gleaned from the weekend conference was that current assumptions of safe setbacks are likely wrong.

Many opponents of large scale industrial wind factories have pressed for setbacks from homes of at least two kilometres. (Ontario’s Green Energy Act prescribes setbacks of just 550 metres.) But studies done by sound experts John Harrison and Richard James now show that in some conditions— over water and rocky terrain and beneath low cloud cover—the low-frequency noise can travel up to 15 kilometres.

Keynote speaker Dr. Nina Pierpont, the author of Wind Turbine Syndrome, explained that “our brains don’t function well” when subjected to long-term sustained low thumping noise from industrial wind turbines.

According to her research 90 per cent of those in her test sample exposed to the “pulsating tone” of the wind turbines suffered from cognitive performance deficit as compared to a control group. Generally they had more difficulty with reading, spelling, math, memorization and recalling the plots of television shows.

Pierpont’s findings extend beyond cognitive issues. She has also observed that stress to the hearing organ is linked to balance, which has a close relationship to emotions including panic and fear. These are the same triggers that cause in some a paralyzing fear of heights.

She observed that two-thirds of her test group—14 of 21—presented “disturbing symptoms” such as the need to flee, difficulty breathing, and panic.

Dr. Arlene Bronzaft recounted her groundbreaking studies on noise and learning done three decades ago in New York City. In her work she documented how children on one side of a school nearest a busy train line suffered from measurable learning impairment compared with students on the opposite side of the school.

Her work led to legislation and changes in the classroom to ensure students has a quiet place to learn, not just in New York, but across the U.S..

She urged the physicians and scientists in the room to continue to produce evidence of the harm of industrial wind turbines.

“You need the studies and the research,” said Dr. Bronzaft. “You need to teach. You need to be political. But I ask you not to give up if you are successful in one area—there are communities in Wyoming, Nebraska, Kansas, Maine and across North America with small groups who are fighting these developers. They will continue to need your help.”

Alec Salt heads the Cochlear Fluids Research Laboratory at Washington University in St. Louis. He illustrated that sound emitted from industrial turbines is many times greater than the audible hearing range—prompting him to work through the answer to his own question—does sound that you can’t hear hurt you?

Salt’s research has shown how low-frequency sound affects the transport mechanism of the ear and hearing structure.

“A big part of the sound created by an industrial wind turbine can’t be heard,” explained Salt. “That doesn’t mean it can’t hurt you. When these structures move frequently and dramatically it can have an effect on a range of symptoms.”

He asked the audience to consider this proposition against other human senses.

“Apply this notion to taste, smell, sight and touch,” said Salt. “Does anyone believe that you have to taste something in order for it to be harmful? We know that ultraviolet light (light we can’t see) can have a dramatic effect on skin and other organs. The notion that we can’t be harmed by sounds we can’t hear is nonsense. We need to stop ignoring the effects of infrasound on people.”

He is less clear about whether symptoms persist after exposure to industrial wind turbine infrasound is discontinued.

Sleep expert Dr. Chris Hanning travelled from the U.K. to explain the effect of industrial wind turbines on sleep. He observed that the need for sleep is universal among animals—that poor sleep leads to a range of disorders from obesity to heart disease.

“Disrupted sleep over time leads to heightened states of frustration, anger and feelings of loss of control,” said Hanning. “This noise is viewed as an invasion of the place in which we go to retreat from life, where we go to feel safe.”

He also observed that the pulsating tone when measured on a spectragraph appears very similar in pattern to a fire alarm: “the tone we use to arouse people from sleep and warn them of danger.”

He has found that the persistent low frequency throbbing of industrial wind turbines is more disruptive to sleep than traffic, aircraft and industrial noise. The only thing worse, according to Dr. Hanning, is the rhythmic bass pounding from a loud stereo or “boombox” nearby.

Like Dr. Bronzaft, Hanning urged his colleagues in the room to continue to produce research and studies. He said illconsidered government policies have created thousands of guinea pigs around the world.

“There are enough folks being affected right now that together we can do the work that government and industry should have done in advance,” said Hanning.

MARS HILL

After the physiological mechanics of the effect of industrial wind turbines had been described the conference turned to the victims. Dr. Michael Nissenbaum has conducted a controlled study of effects of industrial wind turbines on residents of Mars Hill in Maine.

The subjects in his study live within 1,100 metres of an industrial wind installation consisting of 28 1.5 MW wind turbines. His control group consisted of 27 adults living on average 5,000 metres from the wind turbines.

Eighty-two percent (18 of 22) of those closest to the turbine reported “a new onset or worsened sleep disturbance” since the turbines went online. Only one of the 27 of those five kilometers away reported a new or worsened sleep disturbance. One hundred per cent of those closest to the turbines had considered moving away.

JUDICIAL REVIEW

Much of this evidence presented this weekend, will likely be used in January as Ian Hanna of Big Island takes on the Ontario Government in court. Hanna is arguing that the province failed to use the “precautionary principle” when it lowered and removed regulatory hurdles to developers of industrial wind energy through the Green Energy Act. The precautionary principle states that governments or organizations must ensure that its policies do not harm individuals or communities prior to enactment.

It seems clear from this weekend’s Picton conference that the province failed to meet this test.