Better Plan, Wisconsin

Part 1: Wind proposal dividing communities, May 4, 2010

MORRISON – Imagine dozens of wind turbines, standing 400 feet tall, stretching across the farm fields of southern Brown County.

They’d be spinning, day and night, for at least the next 30 years.

Some believe it’s a picture of progress.

“Of course it is. Wind has been used since the beginning of time,” said Glen Martin, a landowner in the town of Morrison.

Others see it as a major misstep.

“What do you do when the wind don’t blow?” said Dick Koltz, a landowner in Wrightstown.

Nine commercial wind farms are already up and running in Wisconsin, but on the table is a proposal for the largest project yet: 100 wind turbines in southern Brown County. It’s known as the Ledge Wind Energy Project.

The project has been proposed by Invenergy, a private wind developer from Chicago.

“The beauty of wind, once it’s installed, it just runs and runs and runs without harmful commodities having to be used up,” said Kevin Parzyck, the project development manager for Invenergy.

“We’re not claiming this is the end all for all power needs. It’s one component of the mix,” said Parzyck.

Parzyck said the electricity generated by the wind turbines would be sold to utility companies in Wisconsin.

The current proposal places 54 turbines in the town of Morrison, 22 in Holland, 20 in Wrightstown and 4 in Glenmore.

One would be on Glen Martin’s farmland in the town of Morrison. He believes the wind turbines are a necessary step towards energy independence.

“We have to produce this electricity and power some place, just like we have to grow a crop some place, just like we have to mine coal some place. This all has been to be done some place and this is a good place to do it,” said Martin.

But it’s not just about going green. Landowners would be paid as much as $10,000 per year for each turbine on their property. That’s quite the bonus, especially for farmers who have seen their share of struggles.

“Let’s face it, it would be nicer and times are tough. I’m sure the last couple of years swayed some of them into doing it. It is attractive,” said Dick Koltz.

Koltz signed a contract to have one turbine on his farmland in the town of Wrightstown, but said he’s now having serious doubts. His opinion changed drastically after seeing the wind turbines up close on a trip to Fond du Lac County.

“It just sort of hit me that this should never be. Not this close and not the area. It just wasn’t a good feeling,” said Koltz.

The feeling was so bad, in fact, Koltz is trying to get out of his contract with Invenergy.

Many of his concerns are being voiced loudly by the group Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy. Spokesman Jon Morehouse says the group is made up of neighbors who think the turbines are unsightly and unsafe.

“It can have mental and physiological effects on your body. There is also the low frequency sound waves as well as the sounds waves that you can hear and those have negative effects from sleep depravation to increase blood pressure,” said Morehouse.

Invenergy denies those claims.

“There’s anecdotal evidence of certain people with problems but there are no scientific studies that there are problems with wind noise,” said Kevin Parzyck, the project development manager for Invenergy.

The opposition group’s more than 200 members still aren’t convinced. They continue to show up at town hall meetings to voice their concerns.

The group’s spokesman turned down an offer to have three turbines on his property. It could have made him nearly one million dollars.

“I would never do something on my land that would negatively affect somebody else in our community,” said Jon Morehouse.

Others say they just don’t care if their neighbors don’t like the project.

“If I decide to go ahead and put something up like that, that’s my right,” said Glen Martin.

Even though Invenergy has been signing up landowners to participate in the project, the company is still in the process of modifying its application with the state. That application will ultimately be reviewed and voted on by the Public Service Commission — a process we’re told is likely still several months away.

Part 2: Wind blowing up storm of opinions, May 5, 2010

MALONE – If you walked out of your home every morning and saw wind turbines in every which direction, is it a sight you would get used to?

“You don’t even notice them anymore. They’ve been here two years and it’s just a part of life now, I guess,” said Ken Krause, a farmer in the Fond du Lac County town of Marshfield.

Or, is it a site you would grow to hate?

“Not these big, industrial turbines. They just don’t belong here,” said Al Haas, a farmer in the Fond du Lac County town of Malone.

It’s something many neighbors in Fond du Lac County will never agree on. Opinions are even more polarized among those who live on the Blue Sky Green Field wind farm . With 88 wind turbines, it is currently the largest wind farm in the state.

Haas has three turbines spinning on his farmland. He makes about $15,000 a year just for having them there. That’s a nice side income with no extra work involved.

“We were told we would basically be able to farm right up to it. We were told there would be basically no land loss to speak of, it just sounded like a good deal,” said Haas.

That extra money? Haas now says it isn’t worth it. He blames the wind turbines for damaging his crops and interfering with his TV reception.

But his main complaint is the noise. He says it keeps him up at night and has led to stress.

“It can sound like a freight train going through the other end of town. The problem is that freight train don’t have a caboose. It don’t stop. It just keeps rolling and rumbling on and on and on, for hours and hours,” said Haas.

“There are probably 3 or 4 days out of the month where they are loud but I think it’s a small prices to pay,” said Ken Krause.

Krause stands on the other side of the wind debate. He even likes the look of the two turbines on his farmland.

“If each community in the country was doing what we are doing, we wouldn’t need foreign oil … Not as much anyway,” said Krause.

Krause points to the pain at the pump two summers ago.

“Some people are already forgetting the $4 (a gallon) gas we had a couple years back. This is helping,” said Krause.

So, are all the wind turbines worth it? That’s what people in Brown County want to know. Some have even contacted people on both sides of the issue in Fond du Lac County to hear first hand with it’s really like living inside a wind farm.

“Is there a place for wind? Maybe. But I don’t think it’s in Wisconsin,” said Jon Morehouse, the spokesman for Brown County Citizens for Responsible for Wind Energy .

The group represents more than 200 people who are opposed to large-scale wind development in Brown County. Many of those people say wind turbines blemish the landscape and pose health hazards.

“We need to slow down, we need to slow down until things get put into place to regulate these industrial monsters to a safe and healthy level,” said Morehouse. “People are going to have to put up with them for 30 years.”

100 turbines are proposed in southern Brown County, with 54 turbines going in the town of Morrison, 22 in Holland, 20 in Wrightstown and 4 in Glenmore. It would be the largest wind farm in the state.

The project is being developed by Invenergy, a private firm from Chicago . The company says the location is one of the best places to harness wind in Wisconsin.

“Wisconsin has very good places for good wind and good transmission capabilities near where the power is going to be used,” said Kevin Parzyck, the wind development manager for Invenergy.

Invenergy is still modifying its application for the project. It will ultimately go to the state Public Service Commission for a decision.

That process will likely take several more months which gives people in Brown County more time to research the issue.

“We want people to go. Go to a turbine, stand under a turbine, see what it’s like, the proof is in the pudding,” said Parzyck.

Though, there are many farmers in Fond du Lac County who say a few days in their shoes would turn most people against wind development.

Part 3: The fight over Wisconsin’s wind future, May 6, 2010

It’s free, it’s everywhere and some think it’s the answer to our ever-increasing energy needs.

“Wind is the most feasible resource for most states because of its ability to scale up,” said Michael Vickerman, the executive director of RENEW Wisconsin. The non-profit group has been advocating for nearly two decades for widespread wind development in the state.

Wind turbines also provide struggling farmers a financial lifeline of thousands of dollars each year.

“For me, it’s a good thing,” said Gary Koomen, a landowner in the town of Morrison.

But as the state Public Service Commission continues to green light large-scale wind developments throughout the state, more and more people are speaking out against the projects.

“We need to slow down until things get put into place to regulate these industrial monsters to a safe and healthy level,” said Jon Morehouse, the spokesman for Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy. The group represents more than 200 people who are against large scale wind development in southern Brown County.

Right now, 9 commercial wind farms are operating in the state, with a total of more than 300 wind turbines. Though, 18 more wind farms have been proposed, which could push the number of turbines in the state upwards of 1,000.

The largest proposal on the table is 100 turbines in southern Brown County. The project is being developed by a private company from Chicago called Invenergy.

“I’ve always been a supporter of alternate energy to start with so it kind of appealed to me a consumer,” said Gary Koomen.

Koomen signed up to have two turbines on his farmland. He stands to pocket roughly $10,000 per year for each turbine. That kind of money can make life a little easier.

“Fun money,” laughed Koomen. “I’ll probably take a vacation.”

The push for wind development in the state stems back to 1999 when Wisconsin set its first renewable energy goal. The idea is to find energy sources that are sustainable.

Currently, utility companies are required to be providing 10% of electricity from renewable sources by 2015. Experts say, right now, the utilities are only about half way there.

“Without the standards, they have no reason to add more renewable energy,” said Michael Vickerman, of RENEW Wisconsin.

Vickerman says wind is the best renewable resource Wisconsin has, which is why he predicts a flurry of development in years to come.

“Wind will be the workhorse of all the renewable energy family. That’s true elsewhere in the Midwest,” he added.

The issue of wind development has divided communities and pitted neighbors against each other. One of the biggest fights continues to be over how close the massive turbines should be to neighboring properties.

Currently, many of the wind turbines are setback about 1000 feet. There are many people, however, who think they should be significantly farther away.

“It can have mental and physiological effects on your body. There are also the low frequency sound waves as well as the sounds waves that you can hear and those have negative effects from sleep depravation to increase blood pressure,” said Jon Morehouse, the spokesman for a group opposed to the project.

Wind developer Invenergy denies those claims.

“There’s anecdotal evidence of certain people with problems but there are no scientific studies that there are problems with wind noise,” said Kevin Parzyck, the wind development manager for Invenergy.

Though, Gary Koomen spoke with his neighbors about their concerns before signing up for the project. He said he wouldn’t have done it if they didn’t want him to.

“Probably not. I value the relationships I have in the neighborhood,” said Koomen.

The state has decided it wants to study the impact of wind turbines a little bit more. A 15 member wind siting committee was recently formed to advise the Public Service Commission on issues like noise levels and setback distances.

“These are legitimate points of disagreement and the more we can come to terms on those two issues, the better off we will all be,” said Michael Vickerman.

Vickerman is on the PSC’s wind siting committee. The committee’s goal is to come up with standards and rules for permitting large scale wind projects in the state.

Vickerman says uniform requirements are important because many communities have passed their own wind-related laws — some of which are designed to try and slow wind developmental.

The local laws may not even matter, however, because approval of large scale projects ultimately falls in the hands of the PSC.

“We have to resolve this issue before the wind industry gives up on Wisconsin,” said Vickerman.

Some admit that’s what they want.

“Whatever happened to using less and using less to the point where we save and use what we have more effectively. The wind thing does nothing but produce more,” said Jon Morehouse.

Much like the wind itself, the debate over wind development looks to be unending.

The PSC wants to have standards in place for permitting wind projects in the state by as early as this summer.

Officials at Invenergy tell FOX 11 they hope to start construction on 100 turbines in Brown County by 2011.

The question is: can these proposals withstand mounting opposition from the people who actually have to live among the wind turbines? The answer is still blowing in the wind.

SECOND FEATURE: Dig the AWEA conference by clicking on the image belo

THIRD FEATURE

Note from the BPWI Research Nerd: The Fond du Lac County home in the photo below appraised for $320,000 in 2007, the year before the Invenergy turbines went on line.

In 2009 the family abandoned the home because of turbine noise and vibration.

A few weeks ago it was sold at a sheriff's sale. The opening bid was $107,000. There were no takers.

A New York bank paid less than the opening bid and now owns the empty house.

CLICK to read about the family who once lived in this home.

The former home of Ann and Jason Wirtz now sits abandoned near the Forward Energy Wind Center, which went online in 2008 in Brownsville. (Photo by Dave Wasinger)

 STATE PANEL DISMISSES WIND FAMILY'S WIND FARM COMPLAINT

Source: The Daily Reporter

By Paul Snyder

May 27, 2010

A family seeking payback for health, business and property losses allegedly caused by a wind farm suffered a setback Thursday when the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin rejected the complaint.

PSC Chairman Eric Callisto said the commission is not the proper forum for personal injury claims and said Ann and Jason Wirtz, who now live in Oakfield, should take their case to circuit court.

The Wirtzes in April filed their complaint arguing the Forward Wind Energy Center in Dodge County, which went online in 2008, caused sleep deprivation, headaches and stomach problems as well as the loss of an alpaca-breeding business and a decline in their property value. The Wirtzes moved from their home in Brownsville in September 2009 without selling it.

The family directed its complaint at wind farm developer Invenergy LLC, Chicago, though the Wirtzes have not specified how much money they want from Invenergy. The Wirtzes did not comment on the project prior to PSC approval in 2005.

Madison-based attorney Ed Marion, who represents the Wirtzes, said they chose to go to the PSC first instead of suing because the commission regulates energy companies and is charged with protecting the rights and interests of the public.

“We’re disappointed by the decision,” he said, “but not entirely surprised.”

Marion said he does not know what the family will do next. He said a lawsuit is the likely option, though the family could appeal the PSC decision.

The PSC’s decision Thursday was good news to wind developers. Joe Condo, Invenergy’s vice president and general counsel, said the PSC was right to stay out of a personal injury claim filed by a family.

“I’m not going to speculate on what they’re going to do or how we’re going to respond,” he said. “This is not a normal course of action for us.”

Jim Naleid, a managing partner for Holmen-based AgWind Energy Partners LLC, which was not involved in the Forward Wind Energy project, said allegations of health problems, such as those claimed by the Wirtzes, simply were not an issue in 2005 when the PSC approved the Forward project. He said he doubts such allegations will attract attention from state wind farm regulators.

“The claims of physical impacts are a recent phenomenon and something that comes from the anti-wind folks in particular,” he said. “If there was merit on a wide-scale basis, I don’t think the PSC would issue these permits.”

The Wirtzes’ complaints came too late to merit PSC consideration, said Commissioner Mark Meyer. The family, he said, has the right to make its statement for PSC consideration of an upcoming 100-turbine wind farm Invenergy proposes for Brown County, but he said the PSC’s review of Forward ended a long time ago.

“The commission,” he said, “is not in the business of handling private causes of action against utilities.”

SECOND FEATURE:

Columbia County Gives Wind Energy a Nod

SOURCE Capital Newspapers, www.wiscnews.com

May 21 2010

By LYN JERDE,

PORTAGE – The Columbia County Board of Supervisors offered tepid approval Wednesday to a resolution declaring electricity-generating wind turbines on five parcels of farmland are in keeping with the landowners’ farmland preservation agreements with the state.

But the non-unanimous voice vote assent didn’t come without questions about the effects of the turbines on farming, and about how the county’s approval or disapproval of the resolution might affect the future of what could soon be the state’s largest wind energy farm.

We Energies plans to build Glacier Hills Energy Park, beginning this spring, on leased farmland in the towns of Randolph and Scott. Plans call for up to 90 wind turbines, capable of generating up to 207 megawatts of electricity.

Five of the parcels leased for turbine locations – four in the town of Randolph, one in the town of Scott – are subject to farmland preservation agreements with the state.

The intent of the resolution was to declare the county’s conclusion that locating a turbine on the land is not inconsistent with the agreement that the land must continue to be used for agricultural purposes.

But why, asked Supervisor Debra Wopat of Rio, is Columbia County even addressing this issue?

The towns of Randolph and Scott are not covered under the county’s zoning ordinances. And the farmland preservation agreements, she said, are between the landowners and the state’s Department of Agriculture Trade and Consumer Protection.

Kurt Calkins, director of Columbia County’s land and water conservation department, said it was the county board that originally approved forwarding the farmland preservation agreements to the state – so the County Board has to authorize a change in the agreement to reflect the presence of the windmills. The DATCP will agree that the windmills do not impede agricultural use of the land if the county also agrees to that, he said.

“The real question is, do you deem them consistent with agricultural use? That’s the question the state has asked us to answer,” Calkins said.

Supervisor Fred Teitgen of rural Poynette questioned whether the turbines are good for rural areas.

“There are problems with large wind turbine systems, especially with noise and shadow flicker,” he said.

That was why Teitgen proposed amending the resolution to say, “Columbia County believes [that] a wind turbine structure may not (instead of will not) conflict with continued agricultural use in the area,”

He also proposed adding to the resolution a condition that the turbines should be sited properly in accordance with Wisconsin Public Service Commission standards and local requirements.

This amendment failed on a voice vote.

Supervisor Brian Landers of Wisconsin Dells said he was concerned that the revision might imply that the county can or should provide oversight for the construction of the We Energies turbines. If that’s the case, Landers asked, then which department would be responsible for the oversight, and at what cost to the county?

“I would be hesitant to add language that we somehow have a governance of this if we don’t have the legal authority to do so,” Landers said.

When Supervisor John Tramburg of Fall River asked how much farmland would be consumed by the turbines and related structures such as roads, Walter “Doc” Musekamp of We Energies said that, among the five land tracts in question, a total of 3.4 acres would be taken out of production for roads and foundations.

Construction of the roads and other ancillary structures is expected to start this spring.

THIRD FEATURE

Wind Farms vs. Doppler Radar

SOURCE: WMBD/WYZZ Chief Meteorologist Marcus Bailey

Lincoln -  Last year a weak tornado touch-downed near Holder in eastern McLean county. That's near the Twin Groves wind farm, one of the largest in the state.

Chris Miller, Warning Coordinating Meteorologist for the National Weather Service in Lincoln explains what happened next.    

"When that storm enter the wind farm area, because the rotation was weak we lost that signature as it went through the wind farm."  Says Miller.  "We had to rely strictly on storm spotter reports in the area."

Here's the concern:  The Doppler Radar beam hits the blades on a wind farm tower, causing interference.  That interference looks similar to a thunderstorm.  Current Doppler Radar uses software to filter out objects that are stationary, but rotating wind tower blades are an issue.

"We don't want to eliminate actual moving storms, but somehow the Radar would need to decide in what area the wind turbines are located and how fast they're moving and then try to remove some of that."  Says Miller.  "That's a very difficult problem to try to do software related."

This isn't an issue when the weather is fair; but when severe weather approaches or moves over a wind farm, meteorologists may not be able to pick out certain features; most specifically tornadoes.  

There are two wind farms that impact the Doppler Radar in Lincoln.  Railsplitter in southern Tazewell and northern Logan counties is the closest and most commonly seen on Radar.  A proposed wind farm may be built in western Logan county, which could also affect Radar images once completed.

So what's next?  National Weather Service officials are educating wind farm developers on their potential impact on Doppler Radar. 

"There is open dialog for the wind farm developers, but if anything we just want to educate them on what some of the concerns are."  Says Miller.  "Hopefully we have future discussions about what can be done to help mitigate the problem."


Tom Vinson, Director of Federal Regulatory Affairs with the American Wind Energy Association says wind developers are in discussions with the National Weather Service on this matter.    The Association hope that the Weather Service can develop software to take care of the problem.

"The preference on the industry side would be for a technical solution that would resolve the problem without having to necessarily give up energy production at certain times."  Says Vinson.   "It's certainly something that should be discussed but it's not something that we have definite agreement on today."  

We contacted Horizon Wind Energy, the owner of the Railsplitter wind farm.  They had no comment on our story.  Oklahoma University scientists are conducting studies on the issue.

Click on the images below to watch the entire May 14th Public Service Commission meeting where commissioners adopted draft wind siting rules containing details the Wind Siting Council had never seen or been allowed to discuss. Specifically, setbacks and noise limits.

The draft that was given to WSC members contained no specific numbers and when the subject of specific setbacks or noise limits has been raised by members of council in past meetings, Chairman Ebert quickly assured them there would be a time to discuss these issues in the future and moved on. Under Ebert's chairmanship, no discussion of setbacks or noise limits has been allowed at any WSC meeting.

On May 17th, after the draft rules were adopted by the PSC several members of the Wind Siting Council spoke about these numbers as being a complete surprise.

Better Plan is in the process of uploading the remaining video of this meeting to be followed with video of the May 17th meeting where Dr. Jevon McFadden gave his presentation regarding wind turbines and human health.

While citing the findings of the National Academy of Sciences, the Congressional Research Service and the Minnesota Department of Health-- all of whom agree that at half a mile negative effects from turbine noise and shadow flicker are no longer a significant problem, Dr. McFadden concluded that wind turbine noise and shadow flicker present no potential to negatively affect health and the precautionary principle was unnecessary in siting wind turbines near homes.

What is the precautionary principle?

CLICK HERE FOR SOURCE: Environmental Health Perspectives

Definition of the Precautionary Principle

A 1998 consensus statement characterized the precautionary principle this way: "when an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically". The statement went on to list four central components of the principle: taking preventive action in the face of uncertainty; shifting the burden of proof to the proponents of an activity; exploring a wide range of alternatives to possibly harmful actions; and increasing public participation in decision making.

The term "precautionary principle" came into English as a translation of the German word Vorsorgeprinzip. An alternative translation might have been "foresight principle," which has the advantage of emphasizing anticipatory action--a positive, active idea rather than precaution, which to many sounds reactive and even negative. Although the principle has its roots in German environmental policy, over the past 20 years it has served as a central element in international environmental treaties addressing North Sea pollution, ozone-depleting chemicals, fisheries, climate change, and sustainable development (3). Precaution is one of the guiding principles of environmental laws in the European Union.

Environmental scientists play a key role in society's responses to environmental problems, and many of the studies they perform are intended ultimately to affect policy.

The precautionary principle, proposed as a new guideline in environmental decision making, has four central components: taking preventive action in the face of uncertainty ; shifting the burden of proof to the proponents of an activity ; exploring a wide range of alternatives to possibly harmful actions ; and increasing public participation in decision making.

In this paper [DOWN LOAD IT HERE] we examine the implications of the precautionary principle for environmental scientists, whose work often involves studying highly complex, poorly understood systems, while at the same time facing conflicting pressures from those who seek to balance economic growth and environmental protection.

In this complicated and contested terrain, it is useful to examine the methodologies of science and to consider ways that, without compromising integrity and objectivity, research can be more or less helpful to those who would act with precaution.

We argue that a shift to more precautionary policies creates opportunities and challenges for scientists to think differently about the ways they conduct studies and communicate results. There is a complicated feedback relation between the discoveries of science and the setting of policy.

While maintaining their objectivity and focus on understanding the world, environmental scientists should be aware of the policy uses of their work and of their social responsibility to do science that protects human health and the environment. The precautionary principle highlights this tight, challenging linkage between science and policy.

Note from the BPWI Rearch Nerd: Better Plan was quite surprised by the commissions sudden adoption of draft rules containing specifics that had not -to our knowledge- been made public. In a process which has otherwise been reasonably transparent, this action by the commission was troubling.

We were also troubled by Dr. McFaddens conclusion that the precautionary principle was unnecessary for those who will be living near wind turbines sited according to the PSC's guidelines. We'll be posting video of his presentation in the days to follow.

THIRD FEATURE: Click on the image below to see an abandoned wind farm from the 1980's. Though the project was went off line long ago some of the disconnected turbines still spin, others stand with broken blades. The project is located in South Point, Hawaii. A newer wind project was recently constructed nearby.

Click on the image below to hear what wind turbines sound like. Bird song can be heard as well in this clip. One way to get an idea of what wind turbine noise is like is to turn up the volume until the birdsong sounds to be at the right volume. This will give you a rough idea of the level of turbine noise present.

WIND SITING COUNCIL MEETING

1:30 PM Monday MAY 17 2010 AT THE PSC

Public Service Commission Building

610 North Whitney Way

Madison, Wisconsin

 [Click here for map]

Audio of the meeting will be broadcast from the PSC Website beginning at 1:30 CLICK HERE to visit the PSC website, click on the button on the left that says "Live Broadcast". Sometimes the meetings don't begin right on time. The broadcasts begin when the meetings do so keep checking back if you don't hear anything right at 1:30.

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: For some, watching a Wind Siting Council Meeting is like watching paint dry. For others it's like watching people toss your future around in their hands. For the BPWI Research Nerd (who is working on a book about the experiences of wind farm residents in our state) it's a front row seat on the creation of siting standards that will either protect the people and avian species of our state, or protect the interests of wind developers, utilities and wind lobbyists. If you live in rural Wisconsin, there is a very good chance that this issue will soon be at your front door.

As we look over the agenda we look forward to discussion of the PSC commissioner's sudden adoption of draft rules last week.

On Friday, the PSC commissioners approved draft wind siting rules containing conditions which include specific numbers concerning setbacks and noise limits the Wind Siting Council has never been allowed to discuss.

For those of us following this issue, this sudden move by the PSC commissioners comes as a complete surprise.

The numbers used for the draft rules come from the Glacier Hills decision, according to the commission.

The setback from non participating homes in Glacier Hills is 1250 feet. The noise limit is 50 dbA and 45dbA depending on the season.

The setbacks and noise limits previdously approved by the PSC which causing so much trouble for residents in existing Wisconsin wind projects are 1000 feet from non participating homes and a noise limit of 50dbA.

AGENDA

MEETING NOTICE
Wind Siting Council
Docket 1-AC-231
Monday, May 17, 2010, beginning at 1:30 p.m.

Agenda

1) Welcome/Review of today’s agenda
2) Review and adoption of meeting minutes of April 29, 2010
3) Update on Commission rulemaking process
4) Presentation: Wind Turbines: A Brief Health Overview
Council member Jevon McFadden, MD, MPH
5) Next steps/Discussion of next meeting’s time, place and agenda
6) Adjourn

This meeting is open to the public.
If you have any questions or need special accommodations, please contact Deborah
Erwin at the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin by telephone at (608) 266-3905 or
via e-mail at deborah.erwin@wisconsin.gov.

SECOND FEATURE:

HAVE YOU REACHED OUT AND TOUCHED YOUR PSC TODAY?

The PSC is asking for public comment on the recently approved draft siting rules

CLICK HERE to get a copy of the draft siting rules approved by the commissioners on Friday, and to find out more about the Wind Siting Council

CLICK HERE and type in docket number 1-AC-231 to read what's been posted so far.

CLICK HERE to leave a comment on the Wind Siting Council Docket

Here is a recent comment from a resident of Greenleaf, Wisconsin

I just read the last siting minutes and the draft document putting setbacks from non-participating residents at 3.1 X turbine height and "1.1" X turbine height from the property line.

In my case this is effectively stealing 690 feet of my property.

My neighbor has 138 acres and I have ten acres. If he doesn't have enough acreage to keep the 3.1 X setback from the "property line", then he does not have enough land host two turbines.

I paid off the mortgage for my land with the property rights intact and I paid the the property taxes on my land for 29 years. If there is anyone entitled to the property rights of my property- it is me.

If the state wishes to exercise eminent domain, then they have a right to do so for public conveyance and I must be compensated for the loss of my property.

The wind developer and my neighbor DO NOT have the right of eminent domain. The Wind Siting Council has a legal and moral obligation to respect the property rights of all Wisconsin property owners and any rules they make must reflect those obligations.

 I affirm that these comments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
 

Dave Hettmann

THIRD FEATURE

Do wind turbines cause health problems?

 by Julia Layton

 SOURCE: How Stuff Works

http://science.howstuffworks.com/wind-turbines-health.htm/printable

Some people living near wind turbines complain of chronic sleep loss, headaches and other symptoms

Wind power accounts for about 1 percent of the electricity prod­uced in the United States [source: Gillam]. Nearly 2­5,000 wind turbines crank out power throughout the country. These massive windmills -- up to 80 feet (24 meters) tall -- capture the energy in wind and convert it into free-flowing electrons that people can use to run dishwashers, air conditioning and lights.

 That 1 percent may not sound like much until you realize that wind power is just catching on in the United States. Huge new wind far­ms accounting for thousands more megawatts of capacity are in development as we speak, and estimates put 20 percent of the nation's electricity coming from wind power by 2030 [source: The Oregonian]. The European Union hopes to reach that percentage even sooner -- by 2020.

 Until recently, there were three main issues regarding the possible downsides of wind power: bird and­ bat deaths, cost, and disrupting the appearance of natural landscapes. But a new objection to wind power has popped up in the past few years, resting on the research of a few scientists. The latest argument states that wind power endangers the health of people who live near windmills. Some people call this theory "wind-turbine syndrome." Although the extent of the phenomenon is unknown, there does seem to be something to it.

 Those concerned about wind-power syndrome are interested in finding out if and how wind power could be making people sick. Is everyone living near windmills facing health probl­ems? Let's take a look at the possible health risks associated with wind farms and find out whether we should be worried about the steady increase in wind-generated power throughout the world.

 Infrasound and The Body

 The rapidly spinning blades of huge wind turbines have an effect on their surroundings, and it goes beyond aesthetics. The blade tips of a wind turbine can spin at speeds­ of up to 80 meters per second, or about 180 miles per hour. In high winds, this rapid spinning can produce sound a­nd vibration -- in addition to disruptions in air pressure [source: MIT].

 The extremely low air pressure surrounding a wind turbine could be the reason why bats die near them. A bat's lungs are very delicate, and it seems the low pressure might cause them to expand to the point of bursting blood vessels [source: NewScientist]. Scuba divers can certainly attest to the effects of pressure on the human body.

 And the corporeal effects of sound -- essentially fluctuations in air pressure that vibrate the eardrum -- are well-documented. For instance, infrasound -- sounds at such low frequency that they can't be picked up by the human ear but can carry through the atmosphere for thousands of kilometers -- is believed to cause certain breathing and digestive problems [source: Infrasound Lab].

 Infrasound is the primary issue for those concerned about wind-turbine syndrome. They also say that audible sound and vibrations contribute to the health problems reported by some people who live close to wind farms. Symptoms of wind-turbine syndrome might include:

    * headaches

    * sleep problems

    * night terrors or learning disabilities in children

    * ringing in the ears (tinnitus)

    * mood problems (irritability, anxiety)

    * concentration and memory problems

    * issues with equilibrium, dizziness and nausea

 Around the World

 As of May 2008, about 25,000 wind turbines are cranking out power across the country -- and the world [source: Gillam]. In Britain, 2,100 turbines supply up to 2 percent of the country's power; Germany, the world's top user of wind power, draws 7 percent of­ its electrical needs from more than 19,000 turbines [source: BBC,BWEA].

 These symptoms have been observed and documented by a limited number of scientists studying small groups of people, and the scientific community hasn't conclude­d whether wind-turbine syndrome exists.

 There are also mixed opinions on whether wind turbines emit infrasound and if the amount is any more than that emitted by diesel engines or waves crashing on the beach [source: CleanTechnica, ABC Science]. But we do know that at high speeds, wind turbines can produce an audible hum and vibration that can be carried through the air. ­It's these sounds and motions that provide clues and possible solutions to wind-turbine syndrome, which we'll explore in the next section.

 Wind-Turbine Syndrome Explanations and Solutions

 It's understood that some people who live in close proximity to wind turbines experience sleep disturbances, headaches and concentration problems. These symptoms and others could be explained as the effects of infrasound as well as constant humming and vibrations.

 But here's the catch: Many of the symptoms of wind-turbine syndrome can also be caused by chronic sleep loss -- simply and unfortunately an effect of living near a noise-producing entity [source: ­­Ohio Department of Health].

 People who live near a highway or busy street may have trouble sleeping, which can lead to other health problems like irritability, anxiety, concentration and dizziness.

 Infrasound Weapons

 There was a rumor years ago about an infrasound-based military weapon that would make people lose control of their bowels and poop on themselves. It was said to be a riot-control device. The rumor wasn't true, as far as we know [source: ABC Science]. But in theory, such a weapon might work.

 To solve this sound issue, new wind-power technology employs sound-dampening systems. Engineers are hoping that these newer systems -- which can block or cancel out multiple sound frequencies -- will reduce any sound-related problems associated with wind farm communities [source: Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft].

 Researchers studying wind-turbine syndrome also recommend a larger buffer zone around wind farms to protect people from any ill effects. Some people say that the distance should be least 1.2 miles (2 kilometers) [source: CleanTechnica].

 Others suggest at least 2 miles (3.2 kilometers) [source: PlanetGore].

 Some wind farms are currently located as close as a half mile (0.8 kilometers) from residential areas.

 Whether we should be concerned with the expansion in wind power ultimately comes down to weighing the pros and cons. Is cleaner, cheaper, domestically produced energy worth the potential side effects of some people experiencing headaches? The hope is that new buffer-zone regulations and sound-canceling technologies can do away with the question entirely.

 If the issue persists, we'll have to decide whether wind power is important enough to pursue anyway -- much like deciding whether building a new, noisy highway that would reduce congestion and increase commerce is worth some unfortunate people losing sleep.

Sources

  * ABC Science. Brown note: bad vibration mega-hurts. May 13, 2008.

      http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2008/05

      /13/2242923.htm?site=science/greatmomentsinscience

    * BWEA.Low Frequency Noise and Wind Turbines.

      http://www.bwea.com/ref/lowfrequencynoise.html

    * CleanTechnica. Wind Turbines and… Health? August 18, 2008.

      http://cleantechnica.com/2008/08/18/wind-turbines-and-health/

    * "Anti-noise" silences wind turbines.

      http://www.fraunhofer.de/EN/press/pi/2008/08/Research

      News082008Topic3.jsp

    * Gillam, Carey. Wind power gains adherents in United States. International Herald Tribune. Reuters.

      http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/19/business/wind.php

    * Infrasound Lab. University of Hawaii.

      http://www.isla.hawaii.edu

    * NewScientist Environment. Wind turbines make bat lungs explode. August 25, 2008.

      http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn14593

    * Ohio Department of Health. Bureau of Environment Health. Health Assessment Section. Literature search on the potential health impacts associated with wind-to-energy turbine operations.

      www.odh.ohio.gov/ASSETS/C43A4CD6C24B4F8493CB32D525FB7C2

      7/Wind%20Turbine%20SUMMARY%20REPORT.pdf

    * Planet Gore. Wind Turbine Syndrome. August 15, 2008.

      http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTgxZjc4NzMyM2YxYTNj

      ZDI5YTNlY2E0YjVhOWNmMGU=

    * The Oregonian. Wind whips up health fears. August 10, 2008.

      http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news

      /1218250522129010.xml&coll=7&thispage=1

    * WindAction.org. Wind Turbine Syndrome. March 12, 2006.

      http://www.windaction.org/pictures/2010