Better Plan, Wisconsin

Home in a wind project, Fond du Lac County

MORE FROM THE DOCKET: What Wisconsin residents are saying to the PSC about recent wind siting discussions

FROM BROWN COUNTY

Dear PSC Members,

My name is Marilyn Nies.

We signed a contract with Invenergy in Brown County.

Boy what a scam this all is. It was like the snake oil salesman in the movies. After two years so much more
information came out concerning turbines.

We also for some dumb reason never put two and two together concerning our daughter. Our youngest child has three separate heart issues. One of them being WPW, which is an electrical impulse disorder.

I am afraid stray voltage and the low frequency noise will harm her. Needless to say we want out of
our contract. They will not let us out.

They outright lied and lied by omission. People do not vacate their houses that they have put their whole adult lives into fixing up for no reason. There is a problem here and no studies have been done. They just keep saying there is no evidence, because nothing has been done!

You are putting the cart before the horse. I and many others feel studies should be done before this goes any further. In addition, in Brown County especially, each turbine should be looked at individually or not at all due to the karst rock features.

My final point is money...... I don't want any money from them.

I don't think many of the other people not signed up want money either. I tried to send the money back that we received direct deposit, they would not cash the check. Since then I have closed the account. Invenergy now mails the checks and I burn them. We want to live here without our land value decreasing and without
health risks.

It is called being responsible. Even 1300 feet is not much if you get a storm like we had Friday. There was a section 1 mile wide by 4 miles long where we had 75 mile an hour winds, come to find out it was a tornado. There are buildings and silos down and damaged all over. How far could a turbine blade or a section of one go? Especially if there was mechanical failure combine with an act of God? Just something to think about.

I sincerely hope you take your time on this issue and get some INDEPENDENT studies done. We
have to live with these the rest of our lives. What is the big deal if it sits another year until we know
for sure?

Marilyn Nies

Greenleaf, WI 54126

FROM FOND DU LAC COUNTY:

Heilman, Alice - PSC
From: Gerry Meyer
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 12:51 PM
Cc: Jones, Krystal - PSC; Paske, Sandra - PSC

Subject: Comments per Commissioners meeting of 8-23-10

Dear Public Service Commissioners Azar, Meyer and Callisto,

My comments are in response to Monday’s meeting concerning the draft rules for wind turbine siting.

I live in the Forward Energy project by Invenergy so I have first hand knowledge of what life in a wind farm it truly like. My statements are not third party or from listening to others.

I have many thoughts based on listening to your meetings last Thursday (August 19) and yesterday (August 23).

Commissioner Azar, you seemed to be concerned for residents living near large industrial wind turbines in that you were looking at sound pressure reading of 40 Dba and a set back that would equal 2200 feet.

Yesterday you relented on your original thoughts.

At 6:55 this morning I went out with my sound meter to take a reading. The wind was from the SW which in my case is the worst sound. I had a Dba of 42 and a Dbc of 58. The sound was bouncing higher, however I tried to go to the low side with a slight feeling for an average sound pressure reading. The sound was bordering on the sound of a jet to a loud whooshing sound.

I talk to people that are having issues with the sound, however do not pay close attention to wind direction. As I mentioned generally the loudest sound is when the wind is from a westerly direction, however when the wind is from the E, SE and NE I get the least sleep.

I believe even a 40 Dba sound pressure is too loud and the commission needs to lower the sound to 5 Dba above ambient or at the very least 40 Dba. I have found that I do get pretty good sleep when the turbines are turning at 11 rpms or less which I would say is slightly above cut in speed.

Often we do not necessarily hear the wind turbines, yet sleep deprivation is present. The wind energy industry is dismissing the affects of low frequency noise and possibly infra sounds. That is why l listed the Dbc level above.

The commission needs to look at low frequency sound. I must strongly suggest you can not compare airplanes, trains or traffic sounds to large industrial wind turbines. The turbines are in a class by themselves as far as the effects they cause.

I do not receive shadow flicker. Well I do get flicker just briefly only several days a year, however in our case the many trees block out any serious effect it may have. I do know a number of friends and now acquaintances that have a horrendous time with shadow flicker.

One of those affected is siting council member Larry Wunsch. If the commission OK’s 30 hours of flicker a year before curtailment they may not understand that could mean 52 days or more of flicker.

Some of the council members felt that a non participant’s property should not be invaded by shadow flicker (the minority). I would tend to agree with that thought. Turn your lights on and off once per second for 40
minutes to see if that would be more than just annoying or a disturbance.

I am the one that submitted my cortisol levels to the docket. Briefly I was gaining weight in 6 to 7 pound increments while trying to eat less. I consulted with a Dr. who suggested I have my cortisol checked. During the time of high sleep deprivation from the 5 turbines with 5/8 of a mile of our house I had it checked. My cortisol level was 254.

After the Forward project was shut down for 21 days last October I found I had lost 17 pounds of the 30+ pounds I had gained. I had my cortisol level checked that very next day after the turbines began turning and the level was 35. It should be less than 100.

Yes, everyone seems to have stress, but I feel the high level was due to the turbines being irresponsibly placed too close to our home.

In my case I have one (turbine) 1560 feet away, one 2480 feet, and three at 3300 feet away. The first two are measured the later three are estimates based on maps. Even a half a mile set back would be a very conservative compromise. One of those at 3300 feet away are as loud as those 1560 and 2480 feet away

I feel the commission needs to enact a property value guarantee. I have seen properties list
for $219,000 and sell for $129,000. I have seen one property be abandoned, I have seen houses go
up for sale and never sell.

I know of homes that have been for sale since the project went up and have failed to sell. I feel prior to large wind turbine constructions my property of 6+ acres, a large farm house completely remodeled, the former dairy barn of 40’ X 92’ and a new 26’ X60’ garage/shop was worth $500,000. I would now estimate it to be worth about $200,000. Those estimates are based on being a carpenter in a previous life.

Wind energy companies constantly state that there is no loss in property value. If so why not be willing to guarantee that statement with a property value protection.

I do not trust modeling as a way to avoid shadow flicker and noise. An example would be mileage standards for cars. Do you get the mileage that is on the window sticker? Industrial turbine manufacturers can manipulate statistics to meet the needs of buyers and builders. Shadow flicker modeling takes into account variables that may not be there. Those models should take in to account the worst case scenario not the least case scenario.

I am offended by I believe Commissioner Meyer’s comment that some of these issues are needed for the good of the whole. Those may not be the exact words, but close.

I don’t believe my family or I or many others that are victims of wind energy should have to make this sacrifice. I know this is not part of the issue, yet on the other hand it is. Wind energy and the electricity it produces is very costly and wind energy is very inefficient. It is not causing any reduction on traditional energy use and is doubtful if it is reducing any carbon dioxide emissions after all the considerations are
factored in.

Part of the draft rule addresses allowing political subdivisions to allow compensation for adjacent land owners up to the amount the hosting farmer is receiving. (Page 36 of 44 128.33 sub 3) Wind energy is not accepted currently because of being improperly sited and the effects it causes.

If there is to be an increased acceptance of the wind industry this would be a great way to achieve it. I have often thought about if I had property value protection and receive the same compensation as my hosting neighbor I might be able to accept some of the disadvantages of this project.

In Monday’s meeting consideration was given to farm animals, domestic animals and wildlife.

My first reaction to that statement is “What about people” “Don’t we have some value?”. We should be at the top of the list.

We used to see deer at least once a week and 16 to 20 turkeys every few days from our house. Since construction of the turbines began (winter of 2007) we have not seen even one deer and only 2 turkeys.

Signal interference was touched on. We do have a satellite dish however we still have our old fashioned TV antenna. We need that to get Green Bay stations. If the wind is in a certain direction we can not get Green Bay.

There are people that rely on TV antennas that need protection from wind turbine interference with out having to fill out a W9 and receive a 1099 at the end of the year. For my internet I have a private company with a free standing tower 5 miles from my home. It is not affected; however other residents may be and need protection from losing their service. There needs to be set backs from emergency frequency beams.

I am concerned about community wind. Community wind needs to be treated the same as regular or large wind. If not what would happen is a community wind project of up to 15 MB would bebuilt. Let’s go 5 miles away and build another community wind project.. Now let’s connect the two and soon there could be 50 turbines that were intended to be a community wind project.

Don’t say that won’t happen. It did in Washington or Oregon.

If you read and research you know that world wide wherever there are large industrial wind turbines there are concerns and complaints about health issues.

Also of concern is decommissioning. Wind energy companies can sell the project, go bankrupt or flee the country. The money needs to be upfront. I believe the wind energy company representatives on the wind siting council grossly underestimated the decommissioning costs.

Standing turbines or even disassembled turbines lying on the ground are not in recyclable condition. They would need to be cut up in small pieces. I doubt that round 1” steel can be conveniently sheered.

I read over and over that Wisconsin’s past laws were a “patchwork” of rules and discouraged wind development in Wisconsin. Let’s leave wind out of this next statement.

If you take my township’s (Byron) building ordinance and compare it to Town of Fond du Lac’s or the Town of Union (Rock County) those building ordinances would be different. Does that curtail building or barns, silos or
homes? Should all building codes be controlled by the state?

There are town and county wind ordinances that are good with months or even over a year of research before their enactment. Those ordinances were never even discussed by the wind siting council.

That needs to be looked in to and the value of those existing ordinances evaluated. The Town of Union, Magnolia and Trempealeau Counties are great ordinances.

Commissioner Azar, it was me that got your attention at the wind siting council meeting asking for a brief conversation after the meeting when Jevon McFadden was giving his presentation. I later talked with Crystal Jones attempting to set up an appointment with you.

I did later receive a call from possibly Brian letting me know a visit together was not going to be possible. My thoughts at the time were for you to visit so that I could give my first hand account of the effects on my family from actually seeing my property for yourself.

I would have showed you around the project pointing our the many others with issues shadow flicker, noise, health issues and homes that are not selling or selling much below their market value.

I based my thought on the fact that in a previous meeting (May 14?) you expressed a concern about shadow flicker. I am disappointed this visit did not seem necessary.

As a tax paying citizen of the great state of Wisconsin I am not in favor of the subsidies, production credits and other incentives to wind energy companies and utilities for wind development.

Enough incentives have been paid over the years to develop wind. I don’t believe those incentives have worked to prove wind energy a viable source of electricity generation. If it was a feasible source of electricity it would have proved itself. I would rather see my tax dollars go to the state buying a house in a wind project and for the commissioners to spend a few weeks at a time living in that house and commuting to Madison so that they can learn for themselves what life in a wind project is really like.

I don’t believe Wisconsin should be promoting the financial interests of wind energy companies and utilities. I strongly believe the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin and the State Health Department should be most concerned about the health affects large wind turbines cause that are irresponsibly placed too close to the residents of Wisconsin citizens.

In summary 50 dba is too high. 45 dba is too high. I believe 40 dba can be too high. 5 dba above ambient should be the standard. Why should a non participant put up with any shadow flicker? Set backs need to be ½ mile or more. Property value protection is a must. Signal interference needs
to be corrected and for the life of the project.

Thank you for considering my comments,

Gerry Meyer

Brownsville WI

Home for sale, Fond du Lac County, WI February 2010

 

BROWN COUNTY TO STUDY WIND FARMS' IMPACT

SOURCE: Greenbay Press-Gazette

By Tony Walter

March 3, 2010

A Brown County Board committee voted Tuesday to form a special committee to gather information about the health, safety and economic impact of wind turbines on county residents. 

A Chicago-based developer is seeking state approval to build the first major commercial wind farm in Brown County, a project that would put 100 wind turbines in the towns of Morrison, Holland, Wrightstown and Glenmore.

The issue came to a head Tuesday because wind turbine opponents said there is evidence that they could interfere with emergency radio communications. But several of the approximately 50 wind farm opponents who attended the meeting said they are as concerned for health reasons.

“This whole thing is being jammed down our throats,” said Marilyn Nies of Greenleaf, whose 5-year-old daughter has a heart disease. Some wind turbine opponents say the turbines can cause a variety of health issues that could affect people like her daughter. “Is it going to hurt us to wait a year or two so real studies can be accomplished?”

Carl Johnson of Greenleaf said the turbines add the turbines will bring low frequency noise, which he called “a new type of pollution.”

Steve Deslauriers of Greenleaf urged the committee to consider a wind diversion ordinance.

“The county’s voice needs to be heard,” he said.

Carl Kuehne of Ledgeview cited university studies in Spain, Germany and Denmark that he said showed wind turbines to be “total, complete and utter failures” in those countries. He said other studies have shown property values decreased 25-40 percent on property adjacent to wind farms.

He asked the committee to recommend a moratorium on wind turbines until a thorough investigation can be completed.

Oil splatters on a Fond du Lac County wind turbine, February 2010 

SECOND FEATURE:

The following commentary comes to Better Plan from a resident living in a Fond du Lac County wind project who wishes to remain anonymous.

You have an attitude problem.

That’s the wind industry’s latest explanation for the growing number of complaints from people living in industrial wind projects.  They say, “You people just don’t like these things.”
 
The implication is that if you just changed your attitude, the problems you're having with turbine noise, sleep disruption, shadow flicker, and homes that will not sell--- all of these problems will go away.
 
As a Wisconsin resident who has been living in a wind project for nearly two years, I have to ask what it is that the industry wants you to like? What is there to like about having your home surrounded by 400 foot wind turbines?  I can’t think of a thing …
 
-Unless you like constant audible and low frequency noise, from whooshing and thumping to grinding mechanical noises and transformer hum.    
 
-Unless you enjoy chronic sleep disruption and associated health problems for you and your family.

-Unless you enjoy signal interference on your radio, TV, and cell phone.   

-Unless you want to live in an area where Flight for Life emergency transport helicopters can no longer land.

-Unless you enjoy the strobe flashing of turbine shadow flicker inside and outside of your home on sunny days and moonlit nights.
 
-Unless you are glad the birds and bats are gone along and other wildlife once so common before the turbines went  up.
 
-Unless you think it’s beautiful to be surrounded by scores of red lights flashing in unison from the turbines at night, or regard leaking oil on the towers and land below as decorative.

-Unless you want to live in a place where wind developers pitted neighbor against neighbor and tore the community apart in a way that will never be repaired.
 
-Unless you appreciate your peace of mind and family relationships disintegrating because of the stress of no sleep and uncertainty about being able to sell your house, because you’ve seen how the houses in your project just sit with no buyers, because you know how few people want to buy a home so near turbines and you can’t blame them—because you wouldn’t want to live so close to wind turbines either.

Except, now, of course, you do.  

This new “blame the victim” PR move underscores the wind industry's own attitude problem, one of insensitivity and an inability to understand and be compassionate toward the people whose problems began only after the wind turbines went up.

 

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: 

There have been a number of reasons why residents of wind projects in our state have asked for anonymity when contacting Better Plan.  Some have family members who work for companies associated with construction of the turbines. Some have family members or neighbors who are hosting turbines. Some are hosting turbines themselves and regretting it, but are fearful of being sued by the wind company for violating the gag order in their contract.

Better Plan is glad to insure anonymity to any wind project resident who contacts us, but we always confirm the identity of anyone who submits material for us to post.

We'd like to thank the family who sent us this commentary.

THIRD FEATURE

Wind turbines stir up controversy in Brown County

SOURCE: WFRV-TV Channel 5 News

BROWN COUNTY (WFRV) – Some Brown County residents say they’re worried about plans to put a 100 turbine wind farm in southern Brown County.

Invenergy wants to build 400-foot wind turbines on 72-square miles of land.
Residents enumerated a host of issues they have with the build at a Brown County Committee meeting Tuesday evening.

Home owners say they're worried about well contamination, noise pollution and potential unseen health issues. A concerned parent speaking from the podium at Tuesday’s meeting said she’s worried the project could worsen her 5-year-old’s heart condition. She wants to delay the project a year or two for a comprehensive study. “I feel like this whole thing is being jammed down our throats.”

Steve Deslauriers, a Town of Morrison firefighter, says he’s worried 9-1-1 calls could be interrupted by the wind turbine’s blades. “If it impacts even one accident scene, it’s one too many” Deslauries tells Channel 5’s Jenna Sachs.

Deslauriers also says he’s worried history shows rescue choppers might not fly near the turbines. “We can look to Fond du Lac County as a guide for how flight rescue would be handled” Deslauriers says. “There they will not fly into a wind farm at night or into a cluster of wind turbines.”

Sachs spoke with representatives from Invenergy and Brown County Public Safety about the 9-1-1 issue. Both parties say they can work together to make sure 9-1-1 signals aren’t interrupted, since the new radio towers haven’t been built yet.