Entries in wind farm contract (66)

4/5/10 Friday night at the movies: Wake up and smell the turbines: 'Windfall' documentary to be screened in Evanston, IL on Friday.

CLICK HERE FOR SOURCE

Windfall (2009)

Director: Laura Israel

7:30 PM • HINMAN THEATER at HOTEL ORRINGTON 

WINDFALL

USA | 80 min. I Director: Laura Israel I Regional Premiere   

ADDED SCREENING on Sat, May 8 • 11 AM • NEXT THEATRE

What do we really know about wind power?  We are told it's 'green energy' and reduces our dependency on foreign oil. 
That’s exactly what the people of Meredith in upstate New York thought when a wind developer offered to supplement this farm town’s failing economy with a farm of their own – that of 40 industrial wind turbines.
Attracted at first to the financial incentives, some of the townspeople grow increasingly alarmed as they find out about side-effects they had never anticipated.
WINDFALL exposes the dark side of wind energy development and the potential for highly profitable financial scams.  With wind development in the U.S. growing annually at 39%, WINDFALL is an eye-opener for anyone concerned about the future of renewable energy.

 

Director Laura Israel and producer Autumn Tarleton will be there in person. Screening sponsored by Comix Revolution.

 The 2010 Talking Pictures Festival (May 6-9)

By Marilyn Ferdinand

Just a few days ago, The Daily Beast and the Transparency International (TI), a global anti-corruption research organization, examined 500 global companies to determine how corrupt they might be based on their ethics and anti-corruption policies.

They found, perhaps surprisingly, that utility companies had the fewest protections against corruption of any industry they examined, including the investment sector.

In case you think The Daily Beast and TI might be mistaken, consider how you feel about wind energy. You’ll certainly never have to clean up an oil spill from it.

Or might you, indirectly?

Industrial-size windmills are the only form of energy that uses energy from the grid—which runs on natural gas and fossil fuels—and there are no data on whether they return more energy than they use.

It’s safe for people, of course. Except that numerous health effects have been noted, including ringing in the ears, interrupted sleep, and headaches that have driven people from their homes.

The turbines also throw ice from their blades that can injure and kill, and they have been known to fall over or catch fire from lightning strikes and shed debris.

It’s good for the environment—except for birds who fly too close to the 7-ton blades of the 400-foot-tall towers and bats, whose lungs literally explode because of an air vacuum that the blades leave in their wake.

Wind energy on an industrial scale is hazardous, unsightly, a noise polluter, and probably consumes more energy than it generates. But most people don’t know that, and that’s by design.

The citizens of the tiny, impoverished town of Meredith, New York, certainly didn’t when the wind energy salespeople came to town to offer financial relief in exchange for leases to build wind turbines there.

The people of Meredith went from naïve nature lovers to big-time skeptics, and from neighborliness to bitter division. Windfall is a cautionary tale of underhanded business dealings, small-town corruption, and laissez-faire citizenship that had to give way under the imminent threat of an irreversible intrusion into their rural idyll.

Meredith is a community in upstate New York that has seen its thriving dairy farms go from more than 1,000 to less than 10. When the energy companies came to town, they made offers to lease land, primarily to the largest landowners because of the need for at least 15–30 miles for a profitable siting.

They offered a profit split to the town. A few people got on board, but had to sign confidentiality agreements that they would not discuss the deal with anyone but their attorney.

Nonetheless, word leaked out that wind turbines would be coming to Meredith when a test tower went up on John Hamilton’s property; Hamilton, one of the few dairy farmers still left, felt villified by the wind energy skeptics, who organized The Alliance for Meredith to do fact-finding on the commercial proposals and consider a town-owned commercial wind project by which all the benefits from a single turbine would accrue to the citizens of Meredith.

As this film shows through interviews, footage of planning board and town board meetings, a visit to a neighboring town that rejected wind energy and one that accepted it and saw the project balloon from a planned 50 turbines to 195 with none of the benefits to the town they expected, the fight over wind power is a painful and difficult process.

Because of tax credits for alternative energy offered by the national and state governments, and a complete lack of regulation, wind energy is incredibly profitable for investors and energy companies. Lessors get about $5,000 and neighbor agreements go for $500. Municipalities get about 1–2% of the profits—when all is said and done, local governments might get enough money to buy a single fire truck.

We also see how Meredith’s town board, comprised of the largest landowners, could pass laws that would personally benefit them financially. Instead of accepting the findings of the planning board, per usual, that wind turbines should not be sited in Meredith, the town board chose to establish a Wind Energy Review Board appointed by and answerable to them alone.

This show of arrogance inflamed the citizens of Meredith and set up an election season that for the first time in a long time, was a real horse race.

Windfall is a comprehensive look at a largely misunderstood technology. It is must-viewing for environmentalists and for small towns who might find an energy worm burrowing into their midst. Clean, safe energy is everyone’s wish. Let’s just make sure we don’t jump at the first carnival barker with a miracle solution. 

The May 7 screening of Windfall is sold out. A second screening has been added on May 8 at 11:00 a.m. at Next Theatre at Noyes Cultural Arts Center, 927 Noyes Street, Evanston, Illinois.

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD:

Better Plan was fortunate enough to see an early version of 'Windfall' and we were struck by the similarities to the Wisconsin experience of wind developers targeting rural towns and local governments. The events detailed in the film will be familiar to anyone who has been called a 'NIMBY' for questioning wind industry practices and claims. For those who know very little about how the wind industry works, this film will be an eye-opening experience.



2/25/10 Wind Project Picture of the day AND Knock Knock. Who's there? It's the same We Energies representative you've already said no to three times this week AND What about that meeting in Brown County?

Home in a Wisconsin wind project. Fond du Lac County 2009

Construction of Wisconsin's largest wind farm put on hold as WEPCO struggles to find willing landowners: use of eminent domain may be only option.

A resident in Columbia county has contacted Better Plan to say We Energies representatives are scrambling to find enough landowners willing to sign the easements needed to begin construction on the Glacier Hills wind project which is set to occupy the Columbia County Towns of Randolph and Scott. The 90 turbine project which was recently approved by the Public Service Commission, would be the largest in the state.

 We Energies representatives are reportedly offering residents a signing bonus of $5000 for completion of contract paperwork by February 28th. The contracts offer landowners a yearly payment of $2,000 with a 2% annual increase.  Residents report these numbers can vary widely depending on the importance of a particular easement to the project.

The easements would give We Energies permission to create turbine noise that will exceed the limits set for homes by the PSC. The easements would also allow such things as trenching for laying cables and transmission lines needed to connect the turbines along with other rights We Energies may need. The duration of a contract of this sort is usually a minimum of 40 years and runs with the land.
 
Some residents who have refused to sign contracts say they are still being hounded by We Energies representatives who won’t take no for an answer.
 
“They’ve tried to make contact with me three times already in the last several days” says Kristine Novak, whose home would be inside of the project. “They are going house to house.”
 
We Energies representatives may not find a lot of welcoming faces in a sharply divded community still reeling from the PSC’s decision to approve the project.
 
 “I guess the best way to describe the feeling in the area is shock,” said the resident who wished to remain anonymous. “Hard feelings that developed earlier have now become worse.”
 
Those hard feelings may well extend to the We Energies Representatives who are now desperate to make deals. Says the resident, “Landowners are telling them to ‘get the hell off my property.”
 
He believes the tension in the community is so high that should We Energies decide to force the project through by use of eminent domain the consequences would be serious.  “People around here will only take so much,” he said.

Better Plan invites residents affected by the Glacier Hills wind project to contact us with their stories.

We hope reporters in our state will follow up on this news-tip and find out more.

 

SECOND FEATURE:

Public Airs Concerns and Support at Wind Energy Meeting

SOURCE: WBAY TV

  Feb 19, 2010

By Jason Zimmerman

A Chicago company wants to build wind turbines on towers 400 feet tall in southern Brown County, using private land in Morrison, Hollandtown, Wrightstown, and Glenmore. If it's fully realized, it would become the largest wind farm in the state.

Those fighting the project held an informational meeting Thursday night, and hundreds showed up. Emotions ran high in the meeting.

"This is an industrial factory that's being dropped over some of the best farm land in Brown County," Sandra Johnson said.

"Wind is a good thing. I'm not against wind energy, we're just against the locations right now. We need to have some better setbacks and in a lot less-populated communities," David Vercauteren of Greenleaf said.

The Ledge Wind Energy Farm would be a 150-megawatt project with roughly 100 turbines.

Those backing it say it would give the county a big financial boost.

"This is a project that offers tremendous benefits in terms of new tax revenue to the county, helping farmers who were struggling, with jobs," Barnaby Dinges of Invenergy said.

Still, those who live nearby raised fears of stray voltage, shadow flicker, and noise issues.

Some say if it's built, they'll leave.

"If they go up as they're predicting, we very likely will move," Johnson said. "The problem is, land depreciates once you're in that turbine ghetto. People don't want to come. People aren't interested in buying it."

Right now the Wisconsin Public Service Commission is taking comments on the project.  A public hearing will take place later this spring.

If approved, construction will likely start in 2011.

2/6/10 The science behind wind farm residents complaints: AND A school teacher's letter from "Turbine Town"

Note from the BPWI Research Nerd:

The complaints of wind farm residents in our state have been routinely met with eye-rolling dismissiveness from wind companies, developers and lobbyists.

Recently, some wind farm residents have noted significant weight gain since the turbines have gone on line.

It's a claim that may seem easy to mock. That is until you look at the science that ties lack of sleep to increased risk of obesity, as this article from London Times as recently done.

The article is followed by abstracts of recently published papers which support these findings.

Does Tiredness Make You Fat?

Source: London Times

Recent research has suggested that a lack of sleep is associated with increased risk of some cancers, heart disease and diabetes. There’s also an increasing consensus that lack of sleep can contribute to obesity. The reason is that our vital hormonal systems regulate and reset the body at night. Our nocturnal functions are vital to our daytime wellbeing.

Sleeplessness makes you fat
Kidney filtration and bowel activity reduce at night. There is little evidence that eating shortly before sleeping, leaving food in an inactive gut, has any ill effect apart from leaving you feeling a bit full in the morning. Though some diet gurus say that eating carbohydrates before bedtime makes you put on weight, it shouldn’t make a difference because your metabolism is working more slowly.

But the hormones that regulate your metabolism and hunger levels do change with sleep. Studies by the National Sleep Foundation in America have revealed that sleep keeps down the levels of an appetite-driving hormone called ghrelin. It also keeps up levels of the hormone leptin, which prevents the body from thinking that it needs more food. In other words, sleep helps you to keep slim, while lack of sleep can contribute to obesity. Experiments indicate that restricting sleep can mean that your body thinks it is short of up to 900 calories a day.

Brain and senses
Our brains career on a rollercoaster of changing activity as we go through the phases of sleep — non-rapid eye movement sleep, which includes light sleep, true sleep and deep sleep, and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, which is when we dream. As sleep deepens, most brain cells fire off less rapidly, but in a far more co-ordinated pattern than during waking hours. With sleep, our eye movements change, darting around wildly during REM sleep. Our mouths become dry but our ears remain alert to noise.

Increased immunity
The immune system is more active at night. Experiments have shown that during sleep it releases more proteins called cytokines, which mean that the system can launch co-ordinated attacks on invaders. Research from Stanford University indicates that the immune system fights invading bacteria hardest at night, and least during the day. In fact, there are studies showing that if we don’t sleep, we become more susceptible to infection from colds. Malcolm von Schantz, associate dean at the Surrey Sleep Research Centre, says that this is why asthma attacks — which can be caused by an overreaction of the immune system — are more common at night.

Skin renewal
Our skin changes at night as it receives extra supplies of blood. Research by cosmetics companies suggests that after shearing off layers of surface dead cells in the day, our skin increases the rate of production of new cells in deep sleep. There is some objective evidence too that the skin is improved at night. A study presented to the European Sleep Research Society suggested that people who were sleep-deprived were consistently rated as looking less healthy and attractive, partly because of their skin tone.

Repair and regeneration
The levels of stress hormones such as cortisol, which keep us active during the day, drop in the evening. Instead, the body secretes growth hormones in large amounts, making us grow up until early adulthood. As we get older, growth hormones are responsible for promoting the repair of damaged tissue. The body also produces more melatonin, which helps us to sleep and may also help to protect us against certain types of cancer. Temperature drop Our in-built body clock lowers our temperature by about 1C at night because our body is far more likely to descend into sleep if it is cool. That’s why we tend to feel chilly if we nod off on the sofa. Temperatures fall to their lowest level during the 10 to 30-minute periods of REM when we need to be under a duvet. As morning comes, body temperature rises, which helps us to wake up.

Limb transformation
Several scientists have noticed that limbs, hands and feet tend to become enlarged during sleep. This is possibly because they have become engorged with blood. Our limbs become paralysed during REM sleep, preventing us from acting out our dreams.

Heart and blood
According to the Division of Sleep Medicine at Harvard Medical School, one function of sleep may be to give the heart a chance to rest from the constant demands of waking life. For most of the night, the heart rate decreases and blood pressure drops as blood is pushed around the body with less and less force. During REM sleep, however, the heart rate increases again.

FINDINGS

SOURCE: European Journal of Endocrinology

Sleep and the epidemic of obesity in children and adults

Eve Van Cauter and Kristen L Knutson

Departments of Medicine, MC1027 Health Studies, University of Chicago, 5841 S. Maryland Avenue Chicago, Illinois 60637, USA

 

This paper was presented at the 5th Ferring International Paediatric Endocrinology Symposium, Baveno, Italy (2008). Ferring Pharmaceuticals has supported the publication of these proceedings.

Sleep is an important modulator of neuroendocrine function and glucose metabolism in children as well as in adults.

In recent years, sleep curtailment has become a hallmark of modern society with both children and adults having shorter bedtimes than a few decades ago. This trend for shorter sleep duration has developed over the same time period as the dramatic increase in the prevalence of obesity.

There is rapidly accumulating evidence from both laboratory and epidemiological studies to indicate that chronic partial sleep loss may increase the risk of obesity and weight gain. The present article reviews laboratory evidence indicating that sleep curtailment in young adults results in a constellation of metabolic and endocrine alterations, including decreased glucose tolerance, decreased insulin sensitivity, elevated sympathovagal balance, increased evening concentrations of cortisol, increased levels of ghrelin, decreased levels of leptin, and increased hunger and appetite.

We also review cross-sectional epidemiological studies associating short sleep with increased body mass index and prospective epidemiological studies that have shown an increased risk of weight gain and obesity in children and young adults who are short sleepers.

Altogether, the evidence points to a possible role of decreased sleep duration in the current epidemic of obesity.

FROM The Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics

Childhood Sleep Time and Long-Term Risk for Obesity:

"Shorter childhood sleep times were significantly associated with higher adult BMI [body mass index] values.

This association remained after adjustment for adult sleep time and the potential confounding effects of early childhood BMI, childhood socioeconomic status, parental BMIs, child and adult television viewing, adult physical activity, and adult smoking.

In logistic regression analyses, more sleep time during childhood was associated with lower odds of obesity at 32 years of age. This association was significant after adjustment for multiple potential confounding factors.

CONCLUSIONS. These findings suggest that sleep restriction in childhood increases the long-term risk for obesity. Ensuring that children get adequate sleep may be a useful strategy for stemming the current obesity epidemic." [Click here for full text]

 

SECOND FEATURE:

A LETTER FROM A SCHOOL TEACHER IN TURBINE TOWN

Clear Creek, Ontario.  Quiet, peaceful.  The sound of the lake; the overhead passing of migrating geese; tundra swans in the early spring.  Deer and wild turkeys.  Clear starry skies.  Silent except for the sounds of the crickets and bullfrogs.  The sight of a small country church across the way, the church I remember attending as a young girl with my grandmother.

Sounds nice, doesn’t it? That was my retreat of 11 years.  A place I called home, a place I loved, a place I miss. It was my heaven on earth.

My home now sits among huge, massive turbines. Eighteen turbines surround me, all within a 3 km radius of my home.  The closest is 400 metres from my back door.

People often ask me what my problem is with the turbines.  (“They’re not very noisy,” I am told.)

The noise is constant, some days louder than others. It is not noise I enjoy or choose to be around. It is noise I cannot escape.

What most don’t understand is that it is the low frequency waves you cannot hear that are so debilitating to one’s health. These frequencies also drive away the wildlife.  I no longer have deer, geese, swans passing by. These frequencies torment my dogs.  These frequencies keep me awake at night.

Welcome to “Turbine Town” Clear Creek, Ontario.

I live with the movement of shadow flicker created by the rotation of the turbines, coming through my dining room window as I drink my coffee in the morning. I have developed a sensitivity in which now I cannot even tolerate the movement of a small ceiling fan.

The skies where I live are no longer clear but dotted with blinking red lights marking the height of the turbines. When the turbines are down, a constant buzzing noise is emitted from the motionless structures. I have developed tinitus in my ears. I hear and feel the pulsating of the turbines and buzzing in my ears. I also feel the pulsating in my throat and chest.

Two homes have been abandoned where I live because of health reasons related to the effects of the turbines. One of these properties is host to 2 turbines. Many properties are for sale. In fact most of the properties where landowners reside on premises are for sale. Real estate sales in my area are significantly less than other areas in Ontario. Some real estate brokers will not touch a property adjacent to a turbine for fear of future law suit.

Nothing is selling in Turbine Town. Land value has decreased significantly because of the turbines.

There is a dividing of the community.  There are those who have signed leases, many of whom are regretting they were mislead or ill informed regarding the turbines. People are reluctant to speak about the turbine situation. These leases contain “gag orders.”  Many of these people suffer, yet are embarrassed and therefore deny the turbines are the cause of their illness.

I have:

  • nausea (often) & dizziness (often)
  • significant hearing loss
  • itchy eyes
  • high blood pressure (recently, an immediate and intense elevation to 180/118, causing severe headache and complete dysfunction)
  • heart palpitations
  • achy joints
  • short term memory loss
  • severe sleep deprivation on a regular basis

Results of a sleep study I had done showed 214 interruptions in a 6 hour period (note:  6-8 is considered normal; 214 is comparable to someone who has attention deficit disorder). I have very little if any regenerative sleep periods. I have been told that I have developed a sensitivity that does not leave my body when I leave the vicinity of the turbines.  The term used was “toxic”—my body is in a toxic state.

I have an ulcer in my nose that does not heal. I am awaiting an appointment in November with an ears, nose and throat specialist (otolaryngologist).

I often have blood in my urine (never was a problem in the past). I am having problems with my lymph nodes. I have been anaemic because of excessive blood loss. Blood work and other tests do not indicate changes which may cause this hemorrhaging. I have spent time in the emergency room at the hospital because of this.

I once thought my degenerating health was part of the natural aging process. I did not believe the turbines could be the cause of my health issues. I questioned myself as to whether or not it was all in my head. I now believe exposure to the turbines accelerate these processes as well as create other health problems.

I am angry, helpless, and disappointed our government would let something like this happen.  I am appalled at their ignorance and lack of compassion. It saddens me to watch my family and friends suffer from the same effects of the turbines.

It is also very saddening for me to see my dogs suffering. I cannot imagine the distress they must be enduring because of their sensitive hearing. I have not figured out what to do about it.

I spend as much time as I can away from my home, away from my son who is also sleep deprived. We are exhausted and miserable. I often seek refuge with friends, often falling asleep minutes after I arrive. They are very understanding.

I feel like a gypsy.

What was once a beautiful place to live has been destroyed.  And for what? I suggest you think about it long and hard before committing to these huge monstrosities known as industrial wind turbines.
·

TRACY WHITWORTH, School Teacher

Clear Creek, Ontario

CLICK HERE FOR SOURCE

WANT MORE? CLICK HERE TO READ TODAY'S "WIND TURBINES IN THE NEWS"

1/30/10 ANOTHER TRIPLE FEATURE: UK's National Health Service takes a closer look at Wind Industry funded health study AND South of the border, down DeKalb and Lee County Way: With 145 turbines running, "It doesn't feel like home anymore" AND What kind of changes will another 150 turbines bring to Livingston County? 

Home in an Illinois wind farm 

Wind turbine sound needs research

Source: NHS Choices Knowledge Service

NOTE: NHS Choices is the online front door to the UK National Health Service (NHS).
http://www.nhs.uk

Behind the Headlines is a service of NHS Choices. It provides an unbiased and evidence-based daily analysis of the science behind health stories that make the news. It aims to respond to stories the day they appear in the media.

Thursday January 28 2010

What were the NHS 'Behind the headlines' findings about the wind industry sponsored health study?

CONCLUSION: [The study is] a non-systematic review of literature. There are several points to be made about this research:

  • There is no clear description of the methods the researchers used to search for available research, nor how they rated the quality of the research they found. Therefore, it is not possible to say that all relevant research was identified, or comment on the reliability of the research that was included.
  • This review panel was commissioned by an industry group, and included a variety of academic perspectives, but not an epidemiologist. Someone with this specific skill set should be included when environmental health hazards are assessed.
  • The link between psychological distress and physical symptoms has not been explored by this report. The acknowledgment that some people exposed to wind turbine noise suffer annoyance suggests that monitoring and maximum permitted levels need to be considered carefully in areas where turbines are planned.

Overall, this review will probably not resolve this controversy as there was a lack of high-level evidence on which to base any solid conclusions. What is now needed are studies that compare people exposed to turbine noise with well-matched control subjects who have not had that exposure. These studies should also carefully evaluate the psychological harms of noise exposure.

More research is needed on wind turbines and health

Source: NHS Choices Knowledge Service

“The noise caused by wind farms can make some people ill”, reported The Daily Telegraph. It said experts have dismissed the idea of a "wind turbine syndrome" as a special cause of headaches, nausea and panic attacks, but have acknowledged that the irritation caused by the noise can affect certain individuals.

The story is based on an industry commissioned review of the current research on the possible health effects of wind turbine noise. It found that the sound (including subaudible sound) is not unique, and does not pose a risk to human health. Although the sound may cause ‘annoyance’ for some people, this in itself is not an adverse health effect.

This research is unlikely to resolve the controversy over the potential health effects from wind turbines. This is mainly because the research on which the review was based is not sufficient to prove or disprove that there are health effects. The review itself also had some methodological shortcomings, and the reviewing group did not include an epidemiologist, usually a given for assessing  potential environmental health hazards.

Further research on this issue is needed. Ideally this would involve comparing people exposed to wind turbine noise with well-matched control subjects who have not had that exposure. These studies should also carefully evaluate the psychological harms of noise exposure.

 

Where did the story come from?

The news report is centred around a review by a panel of independent experts looking into the issue of Wind Turbine Syndrome. Their review, called “Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects”, was presented at a meeting of the Institute of Acoustics Wind Turbine Noise in Cardiff on Wednesday January 27. The presentation was made by one of the experts on the panel, Dr Geoff Leventhall, a UK-based noise and vibration consultant.

Dr Leventhall carried out the review with Dr David Colby, an associate professor at the University of Western Ontario, and other independent experts in medicine, public health, audiology and acoustics. The panel aimed to “provide an authoritative reference document for legislators, regulators, and anyone who wants to make sense of the conflicting information about wind turbine sound”. The review was commissioned by the American Wind Energy Association and the Canadian Wind Energy Association.

What kind of research was this?

This was a non-systematic literature review of the available literature on the perceived health effects of wind turbines.

What did the research involve?

The panel of experts began their literature review by searching the scientific database PubMed for studies under the heading “Wind Turbines and Health Effects” and “vibroacoustic disease”. They provide an extensive reference list of peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed sources.

The researchers reviewed the studies that looked at infrasound (a low frequency sound wave that cannot usually be heard) sounds that can be heard, and the vibration produced by wind turbines. The researchers were looking for answers to the following questions:

  • How do wind turbine operations affect human hearing?
  • How do wind turbines produce sound, and how is it measured and tested?
  • What type of exposure to wind turbines is more likely to be perceived by humans (low-frequency sound, infrasound or vibration)?
  • What are the potential adverse effects and health implications of sound exposure?

The researchers say that infrasound is defined as acoustic oscillations with frequencies below audible sound levels (about 16 Hz). Low-frequency sound, they say, is typically considered as sound that can be heard in the 10 Hz to 200 Hz range, but it is not closely defined.

They also considered how to define ‘annoyance’, which is a subjective response to many types of sounds, which varies among people. They acknowledge that constant low frequency sounds can be a frustrating experience for people, but say it is not considered an adverse health effect or disease. They say that annoyance from airports, road traffic, etc. cannot be predicted easily with a sound level meter.

The researchers give an overview of the evidence on the effects of noise exposure in general. They also give detailed descriptions of the research they found on the effects of wind turbine noise. They say these case series, though important for raising suspicion of harm, cannot show causation. For this, repeated case-control studies or cohort studies are needed.

What were the basic results?

The researchers describe the effect of various sounds on ‘annoyance’. They say that as sound gets louder, more people who hear it will become distressed until nearly everybody is affected. But this will occur to varying degrees. They say it is not clear why some people continue to be adversely affected by sound when it reverts to a low level. This occurs at all frequencies, although there seems to be more subjective variability at the lower frequencies.

The ‘nocebo’ effect is discussed, which is the opposite of the ‘placebo’ effect. This is where an adverse outcome, a worsening of mental or physical health is based on fear or belief in adverse effects.

The researchers also describe the studies they identified that looked at ‘wind turbine syndrome’, where symptoms are said to include sleep disturbance, headache, ringing in the ears, ear pressure, dizziness, nausea, visual blurring, fast heart beats, irritability, poor concentration, memory, panic attacks, internal pulsation, and quivering. They say that the syndrome has no physiological or pathological mechanism behind it, but is an example of the well-known stress effects of exposure to noise, as displayed by a small proportion of the population.

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The panel reached agreement on three key points:

  • There is no evidence that the sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects.
  • The ground-borne vibrations from wind turbines are too weak to be detected by, or to affect, humans.
  • The sounds emitted by wind turbines are not unique. There is no reason to believe, based on the levels and frequencies of the sounds and the panel’s experience with sound exposures in occupational settings, that the sounds from wind turbines could plausibly have direct adverse health consequences.

They conclude that the collective symptoms in some people exposed to wind turbines are more likely to be associated with annoyance at the low sound levels from wind turbines, rather than directly caused by them.

Conclusion

This is a non-systematic review of literature. There are several points to be made about this research:

  • There is no clear description of the methods the researchers used to search for available research, nor how they rated the quality of the research they found. Therefore, it is not possible to say that all relevant research was identified, or comment on the reliability of the research that was included.
  • This review panel was commissioned by an industry group, and included a variety of academic perspectives, but not an epidemiologist. Someone with this specific skill set should be included when environmental health hazards are assessed.
  • The link between psychological distress and physical symptoms has not been explored by this report. The acknowledgment that some people exposed to wind turbine noise suffer annoyance suggests that monitoring and maximum permitted levels need to be considered carefully in areas where turbines are planned.

Overall, this review will probably not resolve this controversy as there was a lack of high-level evidence on which to base any solid conclusions. What is now needed are studies that compare people exposed to turbine noise with well-matched control subjects who have not had that exposure. These studies should also carefully evaluate the psychological harms of noise exposure.

Links to the headlines

Wind farms can cause noise problems finds study. The Daily Telegraph, January 28 2010

Conference over claims wind farms are health risk. BBC News, January 28 2010

Links to the science

Colby WD, Dobie R, Leventhall G, et al. Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects. An Expert Panel Review. December 2009

 SECOND STORY:

WIND TURBINES DISRUPT LOCAL RESIDENTS

Northern Star, www.northernstar.info

By Demarcus Robinson

January 29, 2010

DeKalb County resident Tammy Duriavich has noticed changes since the wind turbines have been turned on near her home. Recently, Duriavich’s horses have been acting differently to the point that one day, her horse bit her.Duriavich said her horses had never behaved in such a way before the turbines were erected. Duriavich also said that her dogs, who are normally quiet, are now constantly barking.

Between DeKalb County and Lee County, 145 wind turbines are officially in use.

“They are turning and generating electricity as of the last week of December,” said Ruth Anne Tobias, DeKalb County Board chairwoman. Tobias said the project went very smooth, taking about six months from start to finish.

Many county residents, though, are unhappy with the placement of the wind farms and find themselves faced with adversity. Though many residents complained about the project before completion and are continuing to do so, the DeKalb County Board did not find enough evidence to abandon the wind farms.

“The county board had to decide if this was an appropriate special use,” Tobias said. “We thought the issues of residents were not enough to cause hardships.” Residents’ concerns ranged from lowered property value to noise complaints.

Resident Roger Craigmile described the noise of the turbines as sometimes being comparable to a circular saw for four hours.

“I was concerned about noise and shadow flicker,” said Mel Hass, spokesman for Citizens for Open Government.

Hass said he talked to other people who live near wind farms in different areas who have had to move the bedrooms to the inside portion of their houses, like the living room, to avoid the sound of the turbines.

After the wind turbines were up and running, some residents found that noise and shadow flicker were not the only aspects that would be affecting them. A change in lifestyle was the consequence for some citizens.

Some of the problems that county residents have encountered are health-related. DeKalb County resident Ron Flex said that his wife’s vertigo has worsened because of the shadow flicker.“My wife almost drove off the road because of the shadow flicker,” he said.

The possibility of relocating has crossed the minds of some of the residents affected.“I might have to move,” Flex said. “It doesn’t feel like home anymore.”

The state of agriculture has also drawn some concern because of the turbines.“Local crop dusters say they won’t fly in the area,” Hass said.

Simply picking up and moving is not an option that every resident has if they aren’t pleased. Duriavich, like many others, have children who are in school in the area. Hass said he has elderly parents who are in a nursing home and his job does not allow him to simply relocate as easily as others can.

“A lot of us are in a situation where we can’t leave yet,” Duriavich said.

Some citizens voiced concerns about how they will deal with not wanting to be burdened with the wind turbines when warmer weather comes. “I can’t imagine the summer. Many of us don’t have air conditioning on purpose.” said DeKalb County resident Paula Kyler. “I don’t know how we’re going to manage.”

The county has made some policy provisions for residents though. “DeKalb County negotiated a property value guarantee within 1.5 to .75 of a mile to a turbine,” Tobias said. “The company [Florida Power & Light] agreed to buy property after fair market value assessment.”

Residents have been advised that this offer may not be totally beneficial. “The property value agreement, according to attorneys, is grossly flawed,” Hass said. Not all residents see this as a fair offer, and they would like to see the agreement benefit them more.

“What if Florida Power & Light and the county guaranteed to buy our property at fair market value as if the turbines weren’t there?” Duriavich said.

The citizens are not entirely sure what they would like to see happen in an effort to patch relationships, but they had some ideas.

“Take care of the noise,” Kyler said.

“Quit, walk out, resign and admit they were wrong,” Duriavich said.

Many residents would prefer to move because the discomfort they feel from the turbines may be too much.

“I don’t know if I can stay,” Hass said. “Maybe if the county board had some compassion, they and Florida Power & Light could work something out.”

THIRD STORY:

Wind farms: Financial Windfall or destruction of rural land?

Source: mywebtimes.com

January 29, 2010

 By Derek Barichello

The topic: Construction of wind turbines in Newtown, Sunbury and Nevada townships

What happened?

Iberdrola Renewables plans to construct a minimum of 150 approximately 400-foot tall turbines within a rural area of Livingston County called Cayuga Ridge. This area includes Newtown, Sunbury and Nevada townships just southeast of Streator. Horizon Wind Energy also plans to build turbines within this area. These projects would connect a line of wind farms that extend to the south of Marseilles.

As Judy Campbell looked out to the north horizon from her rural Manville home and saw a number of wind turbines rotating in the distance, she felt an invasion was imminent.

Campbell fears the expansion will destroy the rural character of those townships.

“So many people came here with dreams,” said Campbell, who is a Livingston County board member. “It’s my belief the area will be impacted in such a way that it will negatively impact the quality of life. We’ll be living inside a power plant.”

That is why Campbell, with the help of attorney Carolyn Gerwin, decided to put the issue on the ballot.

On Feb. 2, residents of Newtown, Sunbury and Nevada townships will get to voice their opinion on this expansion.

Stated in a sample nonpartisan ballot issued by the Livingston County clerk, one question asks if trustees should pass a resolution to stop the construction of new wind turbines before Jan. 1, 2015, and another is a proposition requiring property value guarantee plans for properties within two miles of new wind farm construction.

“It is the first time anybody has asked the people who will have to live around the windmills what they think,” Campbell said. “Something that impacts us locally deserves public input up front.”

In order to get a resolution put on the ballot, a group called People Protecting Cayuga Ridge collected signatures from voters in Newtown, Sunbury, Nevada, Broughton and Sullivan townships. Not enough signatures were collected for Sullivan, and Broughton trustees decided not to take action at their township meeting.

According to Streator City Manager Paul Nicholson, none of the wind turbines affected by the moratorium are designated for Streator’s enterprise zone.

Meanwhile, Iberdrola and Horizon have conducted open houses to answer questions and support their position on the resolution.

At Dwight Township High School Wednesday, Iberdrola hosted an event attended by about 25 residents. Like others, this open house featured displays with studies the company commissioned through independent experts and allowed residents to ask questions to company spokespeople directly. Horizon held its open house at Odell Grade School on Tuesday.

There was concern among all citizens attending the events on how the resolution is written. A “no” vote on each ballot shows support for wind turbine construction, while a “yes” vote is in opposition of their expansion.

“We want people to understand what’s at stake,” said Jeff Reinkenmeyer, director of Midwest development for Iberdrola. “We wanted to make it clear what each vote meant. We also wanted to take an opportunity to field any questions for those residents who have them.”

Why does it matter?

While Campbell looks toward the horizon at her rural residence and sees an invasion, many others, including Nevada Township resident Doug Abry, see opportunity.

With the more than 150 wind turbines constructed in the Cayuga Ridge project, revenue is estimated near $1.5 million in annual payments to those who host wind turbines or live near one, as well as $3.3 million in tax revenue with about $1.8 million going to school districts.

Not only that, but Iberdrola plans to hire about 400 construction workers and 40 permanent positions.

The amount of revenue divided between townships and school districts depends on which wind turbines are designated to which community’s enterprise zones. Abry estimated his township would gain $198,000 and Odell Grade School more than $200,000.

“I see a lot more good coming out of these than bad,” Abry said. “The townships and schools need the revenue. This will mean better roads and better schools.”

Though the annual payments to those hosting wind turbines exist for the life of the turbines, construction in Livingston County is given 100 percent property tax abatement for the first five years through enterprise zone status. Since this will increase equalized assessed value in the county and affect state aid awarded to school districts, in return, those companies are expected to give in-kind payments half of what property taxes would be, according to Adams. This expires after five years. Adams also confirmed the school district can opt out of this plan if state aid payments change and make this plan detrimental to the district.

With the uncertainty of state payments, Dwight School District Superintendent Dale Adams says the school district cannot turn down the revenue, especially with income estimated at $900,000 over five years.

After that expiration date, the property taxes collected from the turbines are expected to offset the loss in financial aid.

“This is still a good deal because it saves the school from taking a hit in financial aid,” Adams said. “It’s a benefit to the school.”

According to Reinkenmeyer, wind turbines have a life expectancy of 25 to 30 years.

While that may be the case from a mechanical perspective, opponents such as Campbell question wind energy’s sustainability without the aid of the federal government. These opponents also question where the liability exists if wind turbines are abandoned or broken.

That is why Campbell said the referendum asks the township to wait until 2015 before opening up debate again on wind energy.

“They have not shown they can sustain themselves without federal subsidies,” Campbell said. “It’s my belief consumers will be asked to maintain them in the future. At what point will we be balking at them for that? Is it possible they could go bankrupt if we do? We have to think that could happen.”

To that debate, Reinkenmeyer defends Iberdrola’s product. He said the company calculated positive rates of return for the long term.

“Wind will be competitive,” Reinkenmeyer said. “The cost of wind versus the cost of other sources of power are competitive. The operating costs are much less for wind. Wind will remain at a constant price because it is renewable, and we don’t have to pay for raw material. And we anticipate federal compensation because every utility is subsidized.”

Other concerns from residents include the towers ruining views, noise generated, blinking lights and liabilities for host farms.

“My wife and I have not decided how we will vote,” said rural Cornell resident John Marec. “We had concerns about the transmission lights and whether they would allow you to have your own alternative sources of power on your property. I got my questions answered, but I still don’t know.”

Campbell believes those factors could ultimately decrease the value of properties within the wind farms, which is why the second part of the referendum asks wind companies to provide a property value guarantee.

At Iberdrola’s open house in Dwight, the company provided data from Michael Crowley, an independent real estate consultant who did studies in Illinois and did not find any negative impact to property value.

“If they tell us that it will not affect our property values, why are they hesitant to give us a guarantee?” Campbell asked.

What’s next?

On Feb. 2, voters will file into schools and township halls to finally voice their opinion on wind energy.

The referendum appears to be a matter of trust and risk/reward. While the rewards are great to the community, will they continue? And is it worth it to deal with certain nuisances for the greater good of the township and school district?

Though it is possible for voters to oppose expansion of wind farms into their townships, that does not mean the wind farms will necessarily cease their plans.

The moratorium is only an advisory referendum and a “Yes” vote would put pressure on the Livingston County Zoning Board to decide whether it wishes to honor the referendum.

If a “Yes” vote does occur, Reinkenmeyer said Ibedrola would continue with its plans, while Horizon did not offer comment.

“We obviously want to understand the enthusiasm level a community has for our projects,” Reinkenmeyer said. “But we would still go ahead with our proposal this spring and move forward.”

Reinkenmeyer said several of the contracts have been signed and confirmed those terms are confidential. He said negotiations still continue with several other landowners.

Campbell, on the other hand, believes it would be a symbolic victory against legislation in favor of wind farms.

“It would tell them, we don’t want to give up our rural character,” Campbell said. “It would be a huge victory for the people who have to live within these wind farms.”

Want to do more?

Registered residents of these townships can vote between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. on Tuesday, Feb. 2. For Newtown Township, voting will take place at Township Hall in Manville, for Sunbury at the rural township hall and Nevada at the Dwight Country Club.

For more questions, Iberdrola’s Jeff Reinkenmeyer can be reached at 262-593-2764. Campbell suggested the Web site at www.windaction.org for more information.

1/20/10 Dead Corporation Walking: What's Enron got to do with the Wind Industry? AND what does that have to do with the value of ag land? AND what happens if you sell your house without telling the buyer about the proposed wind farm? 

Wind Industry Background Check:

The current 'Wind Industry' as it stands would not exist without Enron. This short summary from the University of Iowa explains the connection:

SOURCE: University of Iowa, Center for Agricultural Taxation

"Wind Energy Production: Legal Issues and Related Liability Concerns for Landowners in Iowa and Across the Nation"

Click here to download entire document.

OVERVIEW:
Farmers have long used wind energy. Beginning in the 1800’s, farmers installed several million windmills across the Midwest and Plains to pump water and generate power for lights and radios.

Today, farmers, ranchers, and other rural landowners in suitable areas are utilizing wind energy in a different manner.

But, where did the current emphasis on wind generation of electricity come from?

There were early attempts dating back to the 1970s and 1980s, but it wasn’t until the late 1980s and early 1990s, that Enron (an energy company based in Houston, TX) lobbied the Congress with a friendly “renewable energy” project, and packaged it with their “electricity deregulation” lobbying and political efforts.

Their efforts were successful in getting laws passed at both the federal and state levels that would permit them to tie into the grid, require utilities to buy unreliable and unpredictable electricity (i.e., electricity generated by wind) under Renewable Portfolio Standards, allow them to sell “renewable energy certificates” separate and apart from the electricity, and utilize a newly created production tax credit and take advantage of a special accelerated depreciation rule.

SECOND FEATURE:

More from the University of Iowa report: Property Values

"At the present time, anecdotal data indicates that wind turbines have a depressing effect on nearby land values and are a drag on the ag real estate market.

Most recent anecdotal data from Illinois indicates that assessed value on farmland is dropping approximately 22-30 percent on farmland that is near land where wind turbines
have been placed.

Also, the increased risk of getting sued for nuisance has a dampening effect on value. Likewise, the annual payments, to an extent, are replacement income for the property rights that have been given up in getting the turbines in the first place.

Many of the agreements are quite restrictive in terms of potential development of the property, farming activities, placement of buildings, etc.

A willing buyer would take all of those factors into consideration when determining what price to pay for the property "

- "Wind Energy Production: Legal Issues and Related Liability Concerns for Landowners in Iowa and Across the Nation"

University of Iowa, Center for Agricultural Taxation

Click here to download entire document.

THIRD FEATURE: 

Note from the BPWI research nerd: In an already depressed housing market, those who live in areas where wind farms have been proposed have a new problem to contend with when trying to sell their homes. Will the disclosure about the coming wind farm help or hurt the sale? What happens if you sell your home without disclosing it?

More from the University of Iowa report: Contractual Issues

In a recent New York case, the plaintiff bought the defendant’s farm (including the residence) and sought to have the sale contract rescinded based on the seller’s alleged fraud and misrepresentations for not disclosing that plans were in the works for the construction of large wind turbines on an adjacent parcel.

The plaintiffs submitted the affidavit of a neighbor of the defendant who detailed two conversations with the defendant that occurred months before the defendant put his farm on the market during which the wind farm development was discussed.

The defendant, at that time, stated that the presence of commercial wind turbines on the adjacent tract would “force” him to sell his farm.

When the plaintiff sought to rescind the contract, the defendant claimed he had no duty to the plaintiff and that the doctrine of caveat emptor (“buyer beware”) was a complete defense to the action.

The court denied summary judgment for the seller and allowed the case to go to trial.