Better Plan, Wisconsin

SOURCE: kselected.com

Veteran noise engineer George Kamperman, Board Certified in Noise Control Engineering by the American Institute of Noise Control Engineering, wrote the following commentary after listening to a video clip (above) recorded by Larry Wunsch who lives near the Town of Byron in Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin. The closest turbine to his home is 1100 feet away. Wunsch is a firefighter and also happens to be a member of Wisconsin's Wind Siting Council, a fifteen member group who are now at work on creating guidelines for siting turbines in our state.

There is a must-see-and-hear 9 minute DVD by Larry Wunsch at his home in Byron, Wisconsin.  Turn up the volume on your computer and listen either through earphones with good uniform base response, or listen from a full frequency range sound system.

You may be shocked by what you hear. The wind turbines make a roaring sound like a jet aircraft. The wind turbines radiate an excessive amount of low frequency energy, and this is the primary reason for our new approach (see How Loud Is Too Loud?) for determining wind turbine setback from dwellings.

Whenever you read about noise levels in the media, the decibel (dB) numbers are frequency weighted (dBA). The term is the “A-weighted” sound level. This frequency weighting discriminates against low frequency sounds, somewhat similar to human hearing response at low sound levels. The wind turbine industry has taken advantage of the phenomenon to show wind turbines produce sound levels no higher than the sound from “a gentle breeze rustling leaves of a tree” or “a small flowing stream” or “the refrigerator in your kitchen,” to cite just some of the examples argued by the wind turbine lobby. These examples are all plausible, and the industry probably has data to show it to be true.

What’s wrong with this picture? The wind industry examples definitely do not sound like the jet engine noise outside the home of Larry Wunsch! The problem is that wind turbines generate far more low frequency noise than high frequency noise where dBA is most sensitive. This is a dirty little secret the wind turbine industry has been hiding from the public.

To meet this challenge we have added (again, see How Loud Is Too Loud?) a requirement that both dBA and dBC noise data be published by the wind industry. The dBC frequency scale has a flat, uniform response throughout the audible range and thus is a better measure of any noise rich in low frequency sound. We propose wind turbine setbacks must meet both dBA and dBC limits.

I did an actual instrumentation analysis of the Larry Wunsch (YouTube) turbine noise recorded outside his front door. My measured noise characteristics agreed with the manufacturer’s claimed noise emission. Both sets of data show excessive low frequency noise outside the Wunsch home, and they show the dBC (broadband) turbine noise to be 13 dB higher than the dBA (high frequency) turbine noise.

Whenever dBC results exceed dBA results, it is a clear indication that low frequency noise not measured by dBA is in fact present.   Noise engineers know this; the general public does not. The industry example of rustling leaves, above, would necessiate dBC one dB ldBA lower than dBA, which is clearly not the case outside Mr. Wunsch’s front door.

Behold the wind industry chicanery (deceit) when it pretends rustling leaves = whispering turbines. Rubbish!

Think of dBA and dBC as tone controls for listening to your favorite music. The treble control being the dBA, and the bass control being the dBC. A uniform random noise is often referred to as white noise. When you reproduce white noise and turn down the treble control (dBA) for reduced highs, and turn up the base control (dBC) for more “boom,” you end up with sound close to the wind turbine noise spectrum.

Or consider this illustration.  All propellers produce what’s often called a “haystack” spectrum, where the top of the haystack (peak energy in the spectrum) is determined primarily by the diameter of the propeller circle (twice a blade radius). Think of the whining sound of small model airplanes.  Next, think of the engine sound of an ultralight (single-person) aircraft.  In this case the engine sound has a lower frequency than the remote-control model airplane.  Next, think of the engine sound of a standard, single-engine plane.  A Cessna or Piper Cub, let’s say.  The engine sound is lower than the ultralight’s.  Finally, imagine a B-36 bomber aircraft, where the engine pitch is lower yet.

The point being, as the propeller-sweep-circle-diameter increases, the top of the haystack pitch, or frequency, shifts downward.

Now, graduate to wind turbines. The biggest of them all.  Huge propellers sweeping an enormous circle.  Propellers so big that the peak of the haystack (peak sound energy) is in the 10 and 20 Hz range–and the peak is no longer audible.  Even so, turbine propellers generate plenty of sound energy on the high frequency side, sliding down (increasing frequency) the high frequency side of the haystack, with the result that wind turbine sound spectrum continues to be very audible indeed.

The standard noise meter has had the same two, dBA and dBC, sound weightings since the instrument was invented (around 1940, I believe). The peak in the haystack spectrum for wind turbines is below the frequency range of both human hearing and the range of a standard sound-level meter (10 Hz to 20,000 Hz). In fact, the sound-level meter dBA response becomes increasingly less sensitive to sounds below 500 Hz (2 octaves above middle C on the piano), and has a uniform sensitivity at higher frequencies above 500 Hz. The dBC response, on the other hand, remains uniform thoughout all frequencies above 32 Hz (equivalent to the lowest note on a grand piano) to the upper limit of the instrument (which is 20,000 Hz). The low frequency roll-off below 32 Hz is standardized down to 10 Hz. Thus, this instrument is somewhat useful for near infrasound.

Wind turbines, by the way, do indeed produce infrasound, contrary to misleading statements by some acousticians. Since there is no ANSI (American National Standards Institute) or IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) standard suitable for dealing with wind turbine infrasound, Rick James and I have sidestepped the issue for the time being in our “How To” guide. Rural America will be flooded with wind turbines of questionable value long before a consensus emerges among noise engineers on dealing with wind turbine infrasound. Individuals and communities who are understandably suffering from the infrasound and low frequency noise of turbines cannot wait for ANSI and the IEC to catch up with their dilemma.  That’s why my colleague, Rick James, and I have jumped in and made do with the best off-the-shelf technology, instrumentation, and international noise standards currently available.  When health and homes are under assault, as the research of Dr. Pierpont and many others makes clear they are, it would be unconscionable for someone with my training to look the other way.

Somehow we need to convince government... that wind turbines must be kept away from people’s homes.  That many of these wind farms are in areas of marginal wind energy value makes this even more tragic. 

-George Kamperman

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: For those who had trouble accessing the video of the April 1st Wind Siting Council Meeting, the settings have been changed so they are all now viewable to the public. CLICK HERE for the links.

CLICK HERE for location, time and dates of WSC meetings.   These meetings are open to the public. Better Plan, Wisconsin encourages you to attend.

THIRD Wind Siting Council Meeting Notice

Wednesday, April 7, 2010, beginning at 9:00 a.m.

Docket 1-AC-231

Public Service Commission of Wisconsin

Amnicon Falls Conference Room (1st Floor) Public Service Commission Building 610 North Whitney Way, Madison, Wisconsin

[Click here for map]

This meeting is open to the public

Home in a Wisconsin Wind Project

To address the growing number of complaints and health concerns about adverse health effects from wind farm noise and shadow flicker, the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA)and the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA), hired medical doctors, audiologists, and acoustical professionals to review recent literature on the issue. The resulting report,  "Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects" was released in December 2009. Their conclusion? 

"There is no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects." 

Other equally qualified medical doctors, audiologists, and acoustical professionals have reviewed the same literature and have come to the opposite conclusion.

CLICK HERE to visit the Adverse Health Effects page at The Society for Wind Vigilence Website

CLICK HERE to read their review of the AWEA/CanWEA report.

Their advisory panel includes:

Robert Y. McMurtry, M.D., F.R.C.S.(C), F.A.C.S.
Michael A. Nissenbaum, M.D. 
Roy D. Jeffery M.D.,FCFP (Can)
Christopher Hanning, BSc, MB, BS, MRCS, LRCP, FRCA, MD
Carmen Krogh, BScPharm, Secretariat 
Richard R. James, INCE
John Harrison, PhD
David L. White, EET, CMBB

ANOTHER NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: If you are a Wisconsin resident currently having problems with wind turbine noise or shadow flicker, CLICK HERE to Contact Healthy Wind, Wisconsin

"HWW - Healthy Wind, Wisconsin’s mission is to keep active track of wind-related health issues affecting Wisconsin families. We are committed to assisting residents of Wisconsin who have been impacted by poorly sited wind turbines by processing resident’s complaints and monitoring the progress toward complaint resolution."

PANEL ASKS FOR WIND TURBINE HEALTH STUDY

Source: Green Bay Press-Gazette, www.greenbaypressgazette.com

April 1, 2010

By Tony Walter,

The Brown County Health Department will look into the impact of wind turbines on human health.

Supervisor Patrick Evans, chairman of the Human Services committee, said he thinks the turbines proposed for southern Brown County pose a potential health danger and wants a study conducted.

“I feel there’s a health risk right now,” said Evans, who said he has done wind turbine consulting in Brazil and has health data compiled in European countries where the turbines have been built. “The only way that wind farms in southern Brown County can be stopped is through the health department.”

Chicago-based Invenergy LLC has proposed building 100 wind turbines in the area, with 54 of them in the town of Morrison. Opponents argue that the turbines would deflate land values and create health problems through noise and interference with the groundwater.

The Wisconsin Public Service Commission has authority to approve the turbines but hasn’t yet acted on the company’s request.

Evans said the health department study would be presented to the Board of Health, the Human Services committee and the County Board.

Health Department Director Judy Friederichs said she was planning to investigate the health danger anyway.

“We decided to be proactive after reading many of the comments,” Friederichs said. “But we really haven’t had a speaker on this at any of the state meetings. So we’re just starting to look into it.”

Carlton Wind moratorium approved: Residents seek to protect property rights

SOURCE Kewaunee County News, www.greenbaypressgazette.com

By Kurt Rentmeester,

March 31 2010

The Carlton Town Board approved a one-year moratorium on commercial wind turbines Monday, after more than 50 residents came to a public hearing to oppose the idea.

The board unanimously approved the measure on a 3-0 vote after Town Chairman Dave Hardtke said he received six or seven phone calls from residents who were contacted by the Ohio-based Element Energy to lease their property for wind generation.

Element Energy seeks to lease more than 18,000 acres for 111 commercial turbines as part of a wind farm between Kewaunee and Two Rivers. Wind turbines would be built on properties in the towns of West Kewaunee, Two Creeks, Mishicot and Two Rivers.

Property owners elsewhere have lost rights after signing lease agreements to site wind turbines on their land, according to Jeff Roberts, a town of Mishicot resident. Turbines have had an impact on cell phone and TV reception.

Carlton residents could have concerns if people in neighboring towns agree to the Element Energy proposal, Carlton Town Supervisor Steve Tadisch said. A state wind energy ordinance proposal may supersede state and county setback ordinances, he said.

Residents who sign leases may not realize they could lose their rights as property owners, said Jeff Roberts, a town of Mishicot resident. They also could lose their cell phone and TV reception, as well as have to live with the noise of turbines.

Gary Holly, a town of Carlton resident, learned Fond du Lac County residents lost some of their rights after talking to them last week.

He described one property owner who signed a waiver agreement to permit a wind turbine near his home as someone who “looked down. He was a beaten man.”

Lynn Holly, a business operator from the Tisch Mills area, said she learned about the issue two weeks ago. Property owners who sign contracts cannot discuss the issue with anyone, she said.

Until now, the state has had to go through local town zoning ordinances to site wind turbines. But the Wisconsin Legislature could give power companies the right to set those standards, according to Jerome Hlinak, a town of Mishicot resident. He is a member of Wisconsin Independent Citizens Opposed to Wind Turbine Sites (WIND COWS).

Town of Carlton residents need time to understand all the concerns associated with wind turbines, said Rick Phillips, a town resident.

While the Wisconsin Legislature has mandated exploration of renewable energy, he referred to the state’s efforts as a “knee-jerk reaction” that needs to be thought out.

Green energy grants that power companies are eligible for can be pulled, Hardtke said. Property owners then can lose money, too.

When people sign lease agreements for wind power, Becky Paplham said they should consider the long-term impact on residents with young families.

A state initiative on wind energy could be established to override any town or county ordinances. While Manitowoc County has a 1,000-foot zoning setback, the state could eliminate that.

Hlinak wants people to be concerned about changes in state law that could eliminate county, town and individual property rights.

“I feel we’re losing local control in our township with the state Public Service Commission and the Legislature stepping in,” Hardtke said. “They don’t care how it affects us here.”

SECOND FEATURE:

Sad because you can't make it to Public Service Commssion in Madison to attend the Wind Siting Council meetings as they to put together guidelines to site industrial scale wind turbines in our state?

Be Happy! The PSC is webcasting the AUDIO proceedings live from the Flambeau River Room. The meeting begins at 1:30 PM and is open to the public. We'd much prefer video but we'll take the audio.

Topic of the day:-Developing guiding principles- Developer/owner responsibility

Public Service Commission Building

610 North Whitney Way, Madison, Wisconsin

Flambeau River Room

[Click here for map]

CLICK HERE to download a copy of the agenda

 DO YOUR HOMEWORK! CLICK HERE to find out who is on the siting council

 Wind Siting Council Meeting Live Broadcast

April 1, 2010 Beginning at 1:30 p.m.

Click Here to receive the LIVE AUDIO broadcast of the Wind Siting Council Meeting

The meeting begins at 1:30 but you may want to set up your connection earlier to make sure it's ready.

If the link doesn't work, go directly to the PSC homepage by CLICKING HERE and then clicking on the "PSC Live Broadcasts button" on the left.

Butler Ridge Wind Farm in Dodge County

We Energies picks builders for Glacier Hills
 
SOURCE: The Daily Reporter

March 25, 2010

We Energies has selected The Boldt Co., Appleton; Michels Corp., Brownsville; and Edgerton Contractors Inc., Oak Creek, to build the Glacier Hills Wind Park in Columbia County. (Photo by Joe Yovino)

We Energies has selected three Wisconsin contractors to build the Glacier Hills Wind Park.

The three contractors are The Boldt Co., Appleton; Michels Corp., Brownsville; and Edgerton Contractors Inc., Oak Creek. The project to build a wind farm in Columbia County is scheduled to begin in May or June.

VISIT THE DAILY REPORTER’S PROJECT PROFILE PAGE ON THE GLACIER HILLS WIND PARK <http://dailyreporter.com/glacier-hills-wind-park/>

The project’s construction budget will be between $335 million and $413.5 million, depending on which type of turbines is used and the number of turbines in the farm, said We Energies spokesman Brian Manthey.

In April, the utility will nail down the number of turbines and their locations, he said.

SECOND FEATURE

SOURCE: Public Service Commission

Docket # 1-AC-231

MEETING NOTICE

Wind Siting Council 1-AC-231

Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Pecatonica River Conference Room (Lower Floor)
Public Service Commission Building
610 North Whitney Way, Madison, Wisconsin

[Click here for map]

Monday, March 29, 2010, beginning at 9:00 a.m.

Agenda

1) Greetings:

 Overview of process and expectations, time line

 Introduction of Commission staff working with Council

 Open meeting requirements

 Administration of Oath

2) Self-introductions by members of Wind Siting Council

3) Election of officers: Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary

4) Administrative:

 Reimbursement of expenses

 Schedule of Future Meetings

 Designated substitutes

 Instructions regarding use/enrolling in Electronic Regulatory Filing System (ERF)

 Overview of rule-making process and additional Act 40 requirements

5) Review of Draft Rules Outline/topics

 Explain how developed

 Topics/items that are unclear

 Topics/items not in outline which council recommends for inclusion

6) Discussion of how to proceed with future work

7) Next steps/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.

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD:

Do Your Homework:

Visit the PSC docket for the siting council frequently to see the latest posts, and add comments of your own for PSC staff members to read and consider as they prepare summaries for the Commissioners.

If you want to be sure your comments are read by the commissioners themselves you'll have post your comments again during the later hearing phase so they will be considered testimony.  

Visit the siting council docket by CLICKING HERE to get to the PSC website In the box that says "Link Directly to a Case", type in this docket number 1-AC-231

REQUIRED READING:

For those who are following the creation of the PSC siting guidelines, we'll be posting a series of documents and news stories for review.

Officials cover up wind farm noise report

Want more? CLICK HERE to read Today's 'Wind Turbines in the News' 

OR on the links below to read the stories at their source

3/25/10 Ice, big winds hobble wind farm

SOURCE: Nova Scotia News- The Chronicle Herald

"Extreme winds, along with cold temperatures and a buildup of ice, crashed three test towers and halted power production at RMSenergy’s wind farm in Pictou County, said company president Reuben Burge in an interview in Halifax on Wednesday.

The heavy ice conditions stopped the blades from turning, resulting in a 20 per cent loss of production in January and February, he said.

 

Disease and wind turbines menace bat populations

SOURCE: Orangeville Citizen, Ontario

" A University of Calgary bat mortality study, conducted between 2006 and 2008, determined that the vast majority of bats found dead below turbines near Pincher Creek, Alberta, suffered severe injuries to their respiratory systems consistent with a sudden drop in air pressure – called barotrauma – that occurred when the animals got close to turbine blades.

The study showed that 90 per cent of the bats examined after death showed signs of internal hemorrhaging consistent with barotraumas, while only about half of the bats showed any evidence of direct contact with the blades."

CLICK HERE TO READ THE WHOLE STORY



“It’s been an ongoing disaster since they started to turn in 2008,” Marilyn said. “Sometimes (the sound) can be compared to a helicopter; it’s not something we are able to get used to.”

According to the couple, David began experiencing sleeplessness and fatigue, which caused them to move into an apartment.

“The turbines chased us from our home and we don’t want what happened to our family happening to yours,” Marilyn said.

Opponents say 45 decibels is still too loud

SOURCE: The Allegan County News, www.allegannews.com

By Daniel Vasko, Staff Writer, 

March 24, 2010

More than 100 Monterey Township residents attended a presentation at Hopkins Middle School by the Citizens for Responsible Green Energy Saturday, March 20. The event was designed to explain the harmful effects of industrial wind turbines that are planned for Monterey Township.

The township has been considering modifying an ordinance regulating their placement since August 2009.

“The purpose of the presentation is to teach people about the turbines and how they will affect and impact their lives and quality of life,” Citizens for Responsible Green Energy member Laura Roys said.

According to another citizens group member, and Western Michigan University senior Nevin Cooper-Keels, township officials have been inefficient with drafting a safe and acceptable ordinance.

“The majority of the board on the planning commission have signed leases with the energy companies,” Cooper-Keels said. “My impression is that it has affected their judgment, and the board seems more concerned with an ordinance that will allow as many wind turbines as possible instead of protecting the community first.”

Township planning commission member Karon Knobloch, who owns an option for an easement with GE along with her husband, said in an interview there was no conflict of interest.

“It’s not a conflict of interest to write rules for (the companies); if it were to affect my home alone in some way then it would be,” Knobloch said. “Nobody wants to be awake all night because of noise; it’s our job to make it as safe and comfortable as possible.”

A major concern in drafting the wind energy ordinance has consistently been the sound levels produced by the wind turbines, and opponents have said the 45-decibel limit on all non-associated dwellings is too high.

Marilyn and David Peplinsky, who reside near wind turbines in Huron County traveled to Hopkins to speak about their experiences living near a wind farm.

“It’s been an ongoing disaster since they started to turn in 2008,” Marilyn said. “Sometimes (the sound) can be compared to a helicopter; it’s not something we are able to get used to.”

According to the couple, David began experiencing sleeplessness and fatigue, which caused them to move into an apartment.

“The turbines chased us from our home and we don’t want what happened to our family happening to yours,” Marilyn said.

Dr. Malcolm Swinbanks, who has worked for 23 years as an engineering consultant in the area of sound and vibration mitigation, said the Peplinskys live near turbines that have a 45-decibel limit—the same limit discussed by the Monterey Township planning commission.

Swinbanks also said wind turbines are known to produce low-frequency sounds that many people will find a disturbance. He also said low frequency sounds will penetrate structures and are amplified the more the background, or ambient, noise is shut out.

“It’s not something you get used to,” Swinbanks said. “(Some people) actually become more and more sensitive to it.”

He also said wind power was not as cost effective as people think, and that turbines have a greater “carbon footprint” and produce more pollution than other methods like nuclear power.

He said wind turbines each contain 20 gallons of gasoline and that the turbines run at only 20 percent efficiency.

The planning commission will meet April 12 to discuss further amendments to the ordinance.

SECOND FEATURE:

Amaranth Substation concerns remain

Orangeville Citizen, www.citizen.on.ca

March 25 2010

By Wes Keller,

A TransAlta Corp. executive said last Wednesday there are no plans to expand the Melancthon wind farm northward into Grey County and, in the meantime, the company would listen to anyone who can offer advice on how to deal with complaints of noise from the transformer substation in Amaranth.

Calgary-based Transalta is the successor to Canadian Hydro Developers Inc. (CHD), and now the owner of Canada’s two largest wind farms with a combined capacity of roughly 400 megawatts – at Melancthon/Amaranth and on Wolfe Island.

Jason Edworthy, Trans- Alta’s director of communications, told Melancthon council last Thursday that CHD is “a jewel in the crown (of TransAlta’s generation network).”

He said the township staff had “done a tremendous job” of accounting for the company’s taxes (segregating the amount to be paid by TransAlta to participating landowners), and said it was “exciting to see the areas” on which the township was spending its amenities payments.

He said the only change likely to be seen in the transition from CHD would be signage. (The sign at the CHD office is still the original.)

Mr. Edworthy did have one concern: the township’s reasoning in its call for a moratorium on wind turbine development.

Mayor Debbie Fawcett responded that “people are wary of health implications,” but Deputy Mayor Bill Hill referred to the reduction of assessments near the transformer substation, and said the township “didn’t want others to come in and potentially reduce all tax assessments in half.”

Mr. Edworthy said the “process (of reassessment) did not consider scientific evidence available publicly.”

In an interview earlier last Thursday, Mr. Edworthy said the CHD substation in Amaranth has had “the most investment in the TransAlta fleet.” He said the company has done everything it could measure to satisfy neighbouring concerns.

He said the substation is in compliance with Ministry of Environment guidelines and has sound barriers plus a new transformer. “We don’t know what to fix. We can’t measure any more. If anyone can tell us how to measure (the problem), we would follow through.”

The substation has two 100-megawatt transformers, adequate for the 200- MW capacity of the Melancthon/ Amaranth (Melancthon EcoEnergy Centre) wind farm.

TransAlta is a giant in the industry by comparison with CHD. It has roughly 80 plants in Canada, the U.S., including Hawaii, and in Australia. Why did it make its hostile takeover bid for CHD?

In a nutshell, it needed CHD’s “green energy” plants and future developments to reduce its carbon footprint.

“We have a lot of coalfired plants,” said Mr. Edworthy. “There’s lots of coal in Alberta. The company recognizes it’s got to go green going forward. CHD was a logical target – hostile at the start but friendly at the end.”

Even with the addition of CHD, TransAlta generation is heavily weighted with coal: 4,967 MW capacity with an added 271 MW under development. It has 893 MW hydro with 18 MW in development, 1,843 MW in gas-fired, 950 MW wind power with another 1,123 in development stages, 164 MW in geo-thermal, and 25 in biomass.

At the moment, 57% of capacity is in coal-fired, and 20% in natural gas. Between them, wind and hydro account for 22% of capacity. On location, 75% of capacity is in Canada, 22% in the U.S., and 3% in Australia.

At the time of the hostile bid last summer, CHD had announced plans to expand its operations by 100 megawatts annually in wind, hydroelectric and biomass as well as, possibly, solar.

Going green, TransAlta also needed the expertise of CHD personnel in wind, water, solar and biomass. So the entire staff complement was simply transferred to TransAlta.

Locally, Mr. Edworthy wasn’t entirely certain of the number stationed at the CHD operations centre, but did say there would likely be a dozen involved, which would be an increase from seven permanent a year or so ago.