BROWN COUNTY TOWNS URGE MORE STUDY OF WIND FARM SITES

SOURCE: Greenbay Press Gazette

June 24, 2010

By Tony Walter

 The elected officials of three southern Brown County towns will ask the Public Service Commission to take more time to study possible health and safety issues before approving wind turbine siting rules.

Comments from town supervisors and residents in the towns of Morrison, Glenmore and Wrightstown will be delivered to the PSC's Wind Siting Council next week. A joint meeting of the three town boards was held Wednesday.

Meanwhile, the county's Human Services Committee unanimously approved a resolution supporting the Board of Health's recommendations that turbines not be built in areas where the fractured bedrock and thin soil could lead to groundwater contamination. The resolution will be considered by the County Board at its July 21 meeting.

Invenergy LLC, a Chicago-based company, has proposed to build a 100-turbine wind farm in Morrison, Glenmore and Wrightstown. It is waiting to resubmit its application until the guidelines are approved by the PSC.

Supporting Invenergy's plans are those who say sustainable energy must be encouraged.

The Wind Siting Council released a draft of rules in May and is holding meetings statewide to hear public comments.

Glen Schwalbach, a supervisor for Rockland, has been hired by the three towns to present the comments to the PSC. He isn't addressing the Invenergy proposal specifically but wind turbines in general.

Comments from town supervisors and residents in the towns of Morrison, Glenmore and Wrightstown will be delivered to the PSC's Wind Siting Council next week. A joint meeting of the three town boards was held Wednesday.

In his presentation to about 35 area residents Wednesday, Schwalbach cited three major points: 

 SECOND FEATURE

The letter below was submitted by a resident of the Ashtabula wind project to Jerry Lien a staff analyst for the North Dakota Public Service Commission. It details how NextEra (formerly Florida Power and Light Energy) opted to address the problems of noise and shadow flicker caused by the Ashtabula Wind Energy facility.     

Wind project residents in Wisconsin have been telling similar stories about what happens when they complain to wind project developer/owners about noise and shadow flicker. Also included here is the contract offered by NextEra to the non participating landowners.

[TO] Jerry Lien
North Dakota Public Service Commission

Greetings Jerry,

I appreciate your attention to this matter of the effects of living next to wind turbines. As was discussed in our phone conversation, Next Era Energy is not offering to repair the damage or fix the problem of the noise and shadow flicker imposed on our home, business and property.

They merely want to pay us to accept it. They say we can use the payment to fix the problem ourselves. In order to receive the payment, we must accept this contract as offered, which I have attached to this letter [below]. This contract, as you can see, is a release for the company to negatively affect us.

Furthermore, this contract has more wording in it about keeping quiet about the whole issue than solving the problem. Also you can see that it will be binding on us and our property in any future issues.

$15,000 as a payment is not going to fix this problem. We did not ask for money from this company but requested a relief to the problem at hand.

Scott Scovill from Next Era, suggested for us to buy trees with the money. Trees will not block the effects because they are not tall enough and may take up to twenty years before they would grow even fifty ft. tall.

One solution we suggested was to turn the offending turbines off only during the time they cause shadows. That suggestion was answered by Scott bluntly saying "we're not shutting them off".

Since then Scott or any other Next Era representative has not returned our phone calls.

Mary Ann and I cannot sign on to a contract of this nature. Our attorney advises against it as well. We are not willing to release to the company our property and enjoyment of our home so they can cause noise, shadow flicker, interference, diminishment of property value and the effects acknowledged in their contracts.

We are now suffering from these problems as a result of the decision to allow this irresponsible siting of wind towers too close to our farm.

By reviewing the project you can see there are about four or five turbines to the east of our farm that are causing blinking shadows up to and hour and a half per day for at least 12 weeks of the year. The shadow effects across the windows of our offices are severely disruptive to our business.

How does the Public Service Commission plan to deal with our issue?

 Is this going to be allowed in every wind farm project in the future? Is it going to be allowed that a large out-of-state company negatively impact a local business? Are the residents of this state expected to sell - (quoted from the contract) "the ability to use or enjoy your property, nuisance, injury or harm to persons, anxiety, suffering, mental anguish and loss of ability to enjoy life"?

I would like a response to these questions.

It has been brought to my attention that Next Era representatives have been spreading a lie that we knew this wind farm project was planned before we purchased our property here in Griggs County. This is a false statement and can be proven. We were living on our farm when we were invited to the first meeting of this project.

I request that you make this contract and my letter part of the public record.

Sincerely,
Jim Miller

RELEASE

THIS RELEASE ("Release") is made as of the _____ day of _____________, 2010 by and between Ashtabula Wind II LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Company") and __________________________________, ("Owner") (hereinafter collectively the "Parties") upon the terms and conditions set forth below:

RECITALS:

WHEREAS, Owner is the owner of a certain tract of land located in Griggs County, North Dakota legally described on the attached Exhibit A ("Property") and incorporated herein; and

WHEREAS, Company owns and operates the Ashtabula Wind Energy Center ("Wind Farm"), a wind farm which is adjacent to the Property; and

WHEREAS, Owner notified Company that they are experiencing problems with shadow flicker at their residence on the Property.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements set forth herein, the Parties hereby agree, as follows:

The recitals are true and correct and are incorporated in this Release by reference.

Company shall pay to Owner the one-time amount of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00), payable on or before March 31, 2010, for any and all shadow flicker related to the Property, caused or alleged to be caused by the Wind Farm stemming from, related to or attendant to the operation of the Wind Farm by Company, its parent companies, affiliates, successors, assigns, related companies including but not limited to interference with glare, shadow flicker, diminishment of the value of the Property, the ability to use or enjoy the Property, nuisance, and any injury or harm to persons, including but not limited to anxiety, suffering, mental anguish, loss of the ability to enjoy life, or any other harm or wrong, tort, intentional or negligent conduct stemming from, related to or consequent to shadow flicker from the Wind Farm whether claimed or not claimed, including all claims that could have been brought, or which hereafter might be brought by Owner or any of their successors and assigns.

The matters settled and released pursuant to this Release include all matters, claims, causes of action, and disputes of any nature whatsoever within the authority of the Parties (including third-party claims, indemnity claims, contribution claims, direct and derivative claims, and any other claims held in any capacity) whether or not fully accrued, relating to or arising out of the interference on the Property. The foregoing matters described in paragraph 2 are referred to hereinafter in this Release as the "Released Matters."

The Parties, each for itself and its directors, officers, agents, and/or representatives, hereby expressly and unconditionally release and discharge one another, and their respective directors, officers, agents, representatives, employees, agents, successors and/or assigns, from any and all obligation, liability or responsibility arising from or as a result of the Released Matters.

The execution of this Release shall not be construed as an admission by any Party as to the validity or invalidity of any other Party's position with reference to the issues resolved in this Release and neither party shall, directly or indirectly, seek to take or advance any position before any court, agency, or administrative tribunal, predicated in whole or in part on any term or condition of this Release except in connection with an action to enforce this Release or the terms or conditions thereof.

The fact of settlement, the amount, nature of terms of the Release, and this Release are to are to remain strictly, totally and completely confidential and any breach of the terms of this Release shall entitle the non-breaching Party to seek all equitable relief as well as monetary damages from Owner.

The Parties agree not to make any statements, written or verbal, or cause or encourage others to make any statements, written or verbal, that defame, disparage or in any way criticize the personal or business reputation, practices, or conduct of the other party, its employees, directors, and officers.

The Parties acknowledge and agree that this prohibition extends to statements, written or verbal, made to anyone, including but not limited to, the news media, investors, potential investors, any board of directors or advisory board or directors, industry analysts, competitors, strategic partners, vendors, employees (past and present), and clients.

Either Party, if approached, has the right to state "we had an issue and that the issue has been resolved to our satisfaction."

The Release may not be modified or amended except by a written instrument signed by all the Parties hereto.

In the event of litigation arising out of or in connection with the enforcement of this Release or any dispute arising out of this Release, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and incidental expenses incurred in connection with such litigation proceeding, including all costs or fees incurred on appeal.

The provisions of this Release shall be governed by North Dakota law.

This Release shall be binding upon the predecessors, heirs, successors, and assigns of each Party.

EXECUTED on the dates appearing below their signatures by the Parties' undersigned officers, duly authorized.

Company:
Ashtabula Wind II LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company

By: ________________________________________
Name: Dean R. Gosselin, Vice President
Date: ________________________________________

Owner: ________________________________________
Name: ________________________________________
Date: ___________________________________
 



HAVE YOU REACHED OUT AND TOUCHED YOUR PSC TODAY?

The PSC is asking for public comment on the recently approved draft siting rules. The deadline for comment is July 7th, 2010.

The setback recommended in this draft is 1250 feet from non-participating homes, 500 feet from property lines.

CLICK HERE to get a copy of the draft siting rules approved by the commissioners on May 14th, 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

Click on the images above to hear nighttime turbine noise and see what shadow flicker looks like. The Wind Siting Council draft rules say 20-25 hours of this each year is permissible on non-participating homes. If there is more than this, the developer or operator will give you window blinds.

Read the daily diary of the family that lives in this house by clicking here.

Dissent delays wind council’s progress

SOURCE: The Daily Reporter

 June 22, 2010

Second Feature:

HEARINGS SET ON WIND PROJECT SITING RULES

SOURCE: Journal Sentinel, www.jsonline.com

June 22, 2010

By Thomas Content

Public hearings are planned next week on a proposal aimed at adopting uniform siting rules for wind power projects in the state.

The public hearings and a rulemaking are part of a process launched by the state Legislature when it passed a uniform siting law last year. The legislation essentially delegated to the Public Service Commission decisions on the thorny and controversial questions raised by supporters and opponents of wind power projects at hearings in the Legislature last year.

Questions that must be resolved include how far a wind turbine must be placed from a nearby property or home, and what maximum noise standards should be. The PSC has released an initial proposal for public comment, and an advisory council created by the legislation is also studying the issue.

Public hearings will take place Monday in Fond du Lac, Tuesday, June 29 in Tomah and Wednesday in Madison. Hearings will begin at 1 and 6 p.m. each day. More details about the hearings can be found here.

The legislation was aimed at replacing a patchwork of different rules and moratoriums that have been imposed by counties and towns around the state for small wind power projects.

HAVE YOU REACHED OUT AND TOUCHED YOUR PSC TODAY?

The PSC is asking for public comment on the recently approved draft siting rules. The deadline for comment is July 7th, 2010.

The setback recommended in this draft is 1250 feet from non-participating homes, 500 feet from property lines.

CLICK HERE to get a copy of the draft siting rules approved by the commissioners on May 14th, 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

HAVE YOU REACHED OUT AND TOUCHED YOUR PSC TODAY?

The PSC is asking for public comment on the recently approved draft siting rules. The deadline for comment is July 7th, 2010.

The setback recommended in this draft is 1250 feet from non-participating homes, 500 feet from property lines.

CLICK HERE to get a copy of the draft siting rules approved by the commissioners on May 14th, 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

 AN EXCEPT FROM A POST TO THE DOCKET FROM A WISCONSIN BIOLOGIST:

I posted a previous comment on the PSC website about concerns of Infrasound generated by of the wind turbines. Since posting that comment, I have been contacted by a woman who lives in Byron.

The wind turbines went up over a year ago there, and she has not had good sleep since. She experiences a constant hum and a vibration in the floors of her house that prevents her from sleeping at night.

She said that between the lack of sleep, flicker and noise from the generators, she might as well be living in downtown Chicago. She is a breast cancer survivor and is worried that all of this will cause her cancer to recur. She also stated that Invenergy sold the wind farm to a utility, WE Energies, who denies responsibility because they did not build the wind farm. They will not even listen to her complaints unless she can put some numbers on the problem.

I was also contacted by Healthy Wind Wisconsin, a group that is trying to get resolution of complaints from people living in wind farms.

They told me of a man near Fond du Lac who raises chickens. Since the turbines went up, his adult chickens are sick, and he has seen deformities in his chicks.

The deformities seen by the farmer are similar to those reported in a study done by the U.S. Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory (Shannon et al, 1994). In this study, fertilized eggs were exposed to different levels and frequencies of whole-body low frequency vibration. The results revealed increased mortality and birth defects caused by the vibration.

As a biologist, I am concerned.

Chick development is used as a model of human embryonic development. Are there implications for people living in the wind farm who want to have children? According to "Excerpts from the Final Report of the Township of Lincoln Wind Turbine Moratorium Committee" people in the Lincoln Township (Kewaunee) wind farm have reported an inability to conceive. There have also been serious birth defects in calves, and cows spontaneously aborting in that wind farm.

Are people in the wind farms experiencing problems with low frequency vibration?

According to G.P. van den Berg (2004) "Although infrasound levels from large turbines at frequencies below 20 Hz are too low to be audible, they may cause structural elements of buildings to vibrate." This is borne out in the wind farms as some people complain of hums and vibrations in the floors and windows of their homes and in other structures. If the floor is vibrating, the residents are experiencing whole body vibration.

Infrasound waves are not readily absorbed by matter, so they pass through us. Some people in wind farms say they can feel the sound waves moving through them. As sound moves through any object, it moves the molecules around it. At appropriate frequencies, the sound waves can set up resonances and cause vibrations.

If the infrasound or low-frequency sound waves can resonate and vibrate windows in a home as they pass through them, it is easy to visualize how they may vibrate membranes, tissues and organs in the human body as they pass into and through the human body.

From Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects (2007) Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology (BEST):

"Low-frequency vibration and its effects on humans are not well understood. Sensitivity to such vibration resulting from wind-turbine noise is highly variable among humans.

Although there are opposing views on the subject, it has recently been stated (Pierpont 2006) that "some people feel disturbing amounts of vibration or pulsation from wind turbines, and can count in their bodies, especially their chests, the beats of the blades passing the towers, even when they can`t hear or see them."

More needs to be understood regarding the effects of low-frequency noise on humans." I`ve heard that the vibrations can be felt in one`s body much in the same way as the "deep base" can be felt at a rock concert when standing close to a speaker.

In addition to the acoustic vibrations, the giant spinning wind turbines also produce low-frequency vibrations which travel through the earth, seismic vibrations, in the form of Rayleigh waves.

A study done by P. Styles (2005) reported "We have clearly shown that both fixed speed and variable speed wind turbines generate low frequency vibrations which are multiples of blade passing frequencies and which can be detected on seismometers buried in the ground at significant distances away from the wind farms even in the presence of significant levels of background seismic noise (many kilometers)."

These results were obtained for turbines much smaller than the 400-500 foot giants that will go up in southern Brown County, and for much smaller arrays. The amount of vibration increases by a factor of 10 for every 100 turbines.

From Frey et al., 2007:

"In coursework description of "Whole Body Vibration" Prof Alan Hedge of Cornell University writes: "Vibrations in the frequency range of 0.5 Hz to 80 Hz have significant effects on the human body.

Individual body members and organs have their own resonant frequencies and do not vibrate as a single mass, with its own natural frequency.

This causes amplification or attenuation of input vibrations by certain parts of the body due to their own resonant frequencies.

The most effective resonant frequencies of vertical vibration lie between 4 HZ and 8 Hz. Vibrations between 2.5 and 5 Hz generate strong resonance in the vertebrae of the neck and lumbar region with amplification of up to 240%.

Vibrations between 4 and 6 Hz set up resonances in the trunk with amplification of up to 200%. Vibrations between 20 and 30 Hz set up the strongest resonance between the head and shoulders with amplification of up to 350%. Whole body vibration may create chronic stresses and sometimes even permanent damage to the affected organs or body parts.""

The vibrations residents experience in the wind farms, whether acoustic or seismic in origin, can amplify in internal structures and organs in their bodies. Since some people complain of disturbing amounts of vibration in their bodies in wind farms, and structures vibrating in their homes, there can be no doubt that wind farms create vibration problems.

What might the health effects of this vibration be?

In the study mentioned earlier, increased embryonic mortality was the main outcome of whole-body low frequency vibration of fertilized chicken eggs, but some of the experimental chicks showed deformities.

In biology, agents that cause birth defects are called teratogens. Each teratogen produces a specific range of effects in a species. You can think of the drug thalidomide which had the specific effect of causing people to be born without limbs. The experimental observations of low-frequency vibration teratogenic effects in animals are:

· In chickens: crossed beaks, missing eyeballs and missing bony structures in the skull. Some disorientation and muscular weakness and malformed feet were also seen in experimental chicks (Shannon et al, 1994)

The problems with animal reproduction reported in the wind farms in Wisconsin are lack of egg production, problems calving, spontaneous abortion (embryonic mortality), stillbirth, miscarriage and teratogenic effects:

· In chickens: Crossed beaks, missing eyeballs, deformities of the skull (sunken eyes), joints of feet/legs bent at odd angles (Jim Vollmer, personal communication)

· In cattle: missing eyes and tails (updated Excerpts from the Final Report of the Township of Lincoln Wind Turbine Moratorium Committee)

It is disturbing to me that in chickens and cows in separate wind farms (separated by 50 miles) similar teratogenic effects are being observed, namely missing eyeballs. Based on the correlation of effects seen experimentally and those seen in the wind farm in chickens, these defects may be due to low frequency vibration.

Jim Vollmer, the farmer who owns these chickens, reports that the tin structures on his farm buildings vibrate. If the infrasound/ low- frequency sound is strong enough to vibrate structures on his farm as it passes through, what is it doing to the delicate connections and circulation inside the developing chicken embryos, and inside people, as it passes through them?

Some of the other health effects that have been reported in the Kewaunee wind farm (and other wind farms) could also be explained by low frequency vibration. From updated "Excerpts from the Final Report of the Township of Lincoln Wind Turbine Moratorium Committee " (betterplan.squarespace.com):

Animal health problems in the Srnkas' formerly award-winning herd include cancer deaths, ringworm, mange, lice, parasites, cows not calving properly, dehydration, mutations such as no eyeballs or tails, cows holding pregnancy only 1 to 2 weeks and then aborting, blood from nostrils, black and white hair coats turning brown, mastitis, kidney and liver failure. . . .

Mr. Srnka and neighbors report serious health effects on not just dairy cows. Health problems in residents include
· sleep loss
· diarrhea
· headaches
· frequent urination
· 4 to 5 menstrual periods per month
· bloody noses: Mr. Srnka had cows bleed to death from uncontrollable bleeding from the nostrils
· inability to conceive

According to scientific literature, low frequency vibration could result in the urge to urinate (Frey et al, 2007) , menstrual irregularities, embryonic mortality (Penkov, 2007), which may be interpreted as inability to conceive or spontaneous abortion, birth defects in animals, and kidney problems in animals (Skilianov et al, 2005). All of these effects have been reported in the Kewaunee wind farm.

Many of the remaining health problems in this wind farm could be explained by infrasound/ low- frequency sound exposure or vibroacoustic disease, which is caused exposure to low frequency sound waves over long periods of time.

According to Alves-Pereira and colleagues (2007), The clinical symptoms of vibroacoustic disease (in people) are:

Stage 1- slight mood swings, indigestion and heartburn, mouth or throat infections and bronchitis.

Stage 2- chest pain, definite mood swings, back pain, fatigue, fungal, viral and parasitic infections, inflammation of the stomach lining, pain and blood in urine, conjunctivitis and allergies.

Stage 3- psychiatric disturbances, small nose bleeds, varicose veins and hemorrhoids, duodenal ulcers, spastic colitis, decrease in visual acuity, headaches, severe joint pain, intense muscular pain and neurological disturbances.

In experiments done on rats, low frequency sound has been shown to cause severe trauma to the cells lining the respiratory tract (Oliveira et al., 2001) and the delicate brush cells lining the respiratory tract fuse together.

Infrasound has been shown to damage numerous systems, including the liver and testes, of laboratory animals under experimental conditions , and some effects on people have been noted at 100 decibels. From Infrasound Toxicology Summary, 2001:

"When male volunteers were exposed to simulated industrial infrasound of 5 and 10 Hz and levels of 100 and 135 dB for 15 minutes, feeling of fatigue, apathy, and depression, pressure in the ears, loss of concentration, drowsiness, and vibration of internal organs were reported.

In addition, effects were found in the central nervous system, the cardiovascular system, and the respiratory system. Synchronization phenomena were enhanced in the left hemisphere.

Visual motor responses to stimuli were prolonged, and the strength of effector response was reduced. Heart rate was increased during the initial minutes of exposure.

Depression of the encephalic hemodynamics with decreased venous flow from the skull cavity and was observed. Heart muscle contraction strength was reduced. Respiration rate was significantly reduced after the first minute of exposure." Reference 29, Karpova et al.,1970.

Given this, it does not surprise me that people in the wind farm complain of malaise, lack of concentration, vibration, and cardiovascular effects, among others. Infrasound at very low frequencies has measured nearly 100 decibels in a 17 turbine wind farm (van den Berg, 2004).

What levels of infrasound have been recorded in the middle of a 100 unit wind farm comprised of GE 1.5 MW turbines? At what threshold are effects of infrasound seen with continuous exposure? We need answers.

Is the level of low- frequency sound in a wind farm sufficient to result in vibroacoustic disease?

An investigation of a home in a wind farm revealed that the home had levels of Infrasound and low- frequency vibration conducive to the formation of vibroacoustic disease (Alvez-Pereira et al 2007, In-Home Wind Turbine Noise is Conducive to Vibroacoustic Disease posted on www.wind-watch.org). More investigations like this need to be done, as not all homes in a wind farm will be affected equally by these agents.

In people with occupational exposure to low frequency sound, it can take 10 years to reach stage 3 vibroacoustic disease. Therefore, to know the full health effects of wind turbines, we need to look at older wind farms as well.

In a complex generating 150 megawatts of electricity, there will be some electrical pollution. Wind turbines create "dirty electricity" which has been implicated in a variety of symptoms (Havas, M. 2006).

David Colling of Ontario, who has studied the dirty electricity created by wind farms, describes the effects on people as being "like living inside a microwave." The effects are reduced with buried cables, but there are still effects, especially around substations. (See David Colling`s You Tube videos on electrical pollution and wind turbines)

If not carefully constructed, electricity from the turbines can overload rural power grids, back up into people`s homes and barns, and into the ground, creating ground currents.

All electricity generated has to complete a circuit and flow back to the site of production through the neutral return wire. There are grounding rods on the neutral return wires, so that some current can constantly flow down the grounding rods and through the earth back to the substation, more when the wire is overloaded or corroded.

A Minnesota study found that up to 70% of the neutral current returns to the substation via the earth, in some areas, in the form of ground current.

Dr. Duane Dahlberg has stated "Dairy operators are frequently required by state codes to construct equipotential planes in their barns as a means of avoiding electric shocks for the cows. Unfortunately the equipotential plane is a good conductor which attracts a greater percentage of the ground currents, causes the cows to be exposed to greater continuous currents, and frequently increases stray voltage effects . . . On dairy farms, current in the ground is associated with behavioral, health and production effects in cows."

These effects have occurred in Mr. Srnkas cattle in the Lincoln Township wind farm.

100 turbines (with dangerous levels of rotor shaft voltages, up to 1200 volts) and 80 miles of cable carrying up to 150 megawatts of electricity will need to be grounded also, resulting in more current in our ground to get into homes.

The electricity generated has to find its way back to the wind farm, a portion of which will travel through the ground in currents and become concentrated in the wind farm as it makes its way back. Ground currents enter our homes through plumbing and other conduits creating magnetic fields.

Wertheimer, Savitz, and Leeper published a paper in 1995 that showed an association between cancer and conductive plumbing in residences, suggesting an increased cancer risk for persons with elevated magnetic fields from ground currents.

The utility can contribute to electrical pollution in another way when they connect the neutral on the primary side of the transformer serving a farm to the neutral on the secondary of the transformer. The National Electrical Code (NEC), which covers farm wiring, requires that the secondary neutral be hard wired to a building`s water system, structure and electrical ground rod. So, if the transmission line neutral is overloaded, more current from the electrical transmission neutral flows into the plumbing and structures on the farm.

Here in Wisconsin currents can be measured flowing through the grounds of the transmission lines, as opposed to California where much larger neutral cables are used and current cannot be measured at the ground.

Electricity from the neutral or from ground currents flowing through plumbing can result in EMF and contact currents. According to a study done by Douglas (1993), the electric current flowing through water pipes and other grounding paths may be the largest magnetic field source in the home other than appliances.

Exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) has been linked to the formation of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrigs disease) and is considered "possibly carcinogenic" by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

A study in Turkey demonstrated that men who worked around low frequency EMF had higher levels of genotoxic effects in their lymphocytes. Genotoxic events are mutations which may result in cancers or other adverse outcomes. Children are especially susceptible to the effects of EMF (Kheifets, 2005); exposure above 0.4 µT has been linked to the formation of childhood leukemia (Ahlbom et al, 2001, Angelillo and Villari, 1999).

Rates of childhood cancer have been found to be increased for children living within 600 meters of electrical transmission lines at time of birth (Draper et al, 2005). Experts have argued that we should do all we can to reduce exposure to EMF in children and fetuses (Carpenter and Sage, 2008). Building 150 megawatt electricity generating complex around families seems unwise to me. It would make more sense to put wind farms in unpopulated areas.

Exposure to more than one of these agents at a time, as occurs in wind farms, may result in especially detrimental health effects.

From the research literature it appears that the combination of both whole body vibration and low frequency noise is particularly dangerous. Low frequency sound alone is not genotoxic, but when combined with vibration, chronic occupational exposure has genotoxic effects (Silva et al., 1999, 2002).

This result has been replicated in laboratory animal experiments, demonstrating the mutations are definitely due to the combination of whole body vibration and low frequency noise. Again, genotoxic effects can result in cancer, and cancers have occurred in cattle in the Lincoln Township wind farm. Yet, to my knowledge, no one has studied genotoxic events in wind farms, or even the mortality rates in herds or people in the wind farms.

When I first looked at the list of symptoms being reported from the wind farm in Lincoln Township, I doubted such seemingly disparate symptoms could all be caused by wind turbines. A survey of scientific literature revealed plausible explanations for them based on exposures to infrasound/low frequency sound, vibration and electrical pollution.

We may all be exposed to some of these agents each day, but we know wind farms create these forms of pollution, increasing the dosage (and duration) of exposure for people living inside the wind energy complex.

The scientific literature tells us of detrimental health effects from prolonged occupational exposure to these agents including vibroacoustic disease, genotoxic effects and embryonic mortality. People and animals in the wind farms seem to be suffering the very effects the science would predict for overexposure to these agents.

Many research studies demonstrate that the detrimental effects of exposure to these agents increase in severity with increasing time of exposure.

It concerns me that there are no scientifically-established safe levels for continuous exposure to this combination of agents.

In occupational exposures people can go home after 8 hours of work and have 16 hours for their bodies to actively recover from the exposures, 64 hours on the weekend.

People in a wind energy complex don`t get that break from exposure.

Safe levels are likely to be considerably lower for the elderly, those with underlying health problems, pregnant women, children and fetuses.

The standards we have also do not take into consideration the compounding of effects which can result from exposure to multiple agents at one time. Based on the chicken embryo studies, any level of exposure to low frequency vibration may pose some risk to developing embryos, as no threshold effect was observed (Shannon et al., 1994).

We have reports of animals in the wind farms here in Wisconsin with reproductive problems. Scott Srnkas cows suffer spontaneous abortion, problems calving, birth defects such as missing eyeballs and tails - all since the wind turbines.

Jim Vollmer has seen changes in his chicken`s reproduction - lower hatch rates and birth defects such as missing eyeballs and crossed beaks.

Ann Wirtz has reported reproductive problems in her alpacas. Since the wind farm became operational, they have not been able to accomplish a live birth - pregnancy always results in miscarriage or stillbirth. There are other reports of chickens no longer laying eggs, and there may be more reports of reproductive effects of which I am not aware.

People living in the Lincoln Township wind complex have reported an inability to conceive. It appears, from the scientific literature, that vibration is a reproductive hazard which can result in miscarriage, stillbirth and other changes in the reproductive system of women (Balichiyeva, 1993, Marinova, 1976, Penkov, 2007, Seidel, 1993).

In rats it can reduce the blood flow to the reproductive organs (Nakamura 1996). What happens to little girls growing up in the wind farms, experiencing the continual "deep base" type vibration that people feel in their bodies and the microseismic vibrations? Are their reproductive organs affected? What about their egg cells experiencing the low frequency sound and vibration, a combination which could be genotoxic? Girls are born with all the egg cells they will ever have.

To my knowledge, no one has even studied the fertility rates or rates of birth defects in people and animals in wind farms, or in people exposed to wind farms. We need concrete scientific proof that the vibration, acoustic and electrical pollution created by wind farms will not cause disease, birth defects or infertility in anyone, before continuing to build them.

I`ve heard arguments for wind energy stating that it reduces coal emissions and therefore also reduces birth defects caused by those emissions.

Based on the reports out of the wind farms, there could be far worse reproductive consequences in people or animals (infertility, spontaneous abortion or miscarriage, stillbirth, and birth defects) as a result of wind energy than there ever was from coal emissions or nuclear power in this country.

This needs to be studied. In Europe vibration exposure is recognized as a potential reproductive hazard (EU Directive 92/85/EEC), and vibration or EMF exposures can result in reproductive problems in people, or animals under experimental conditions (Al-Akhras, 2008, Brown et al., 1992, Hardell and Sage, 2008, Kim et al, 1999, Lahijani et al, 2007, Penkov , 2007, Seidel, 1993, Uysal et al, 2004).

On many levels wind farming raises concerns, but none more than the health complaints of residents of wind farms.

One cannot read the updated report from Lincoln Township without being concerned. The problems being reported are not just nuisances. When complaints arise in the wind farms, people, homes and farms should be monitored for low frequency sound/infrasound, vibration and electrical pollution.

If this were done on a regular basis, we would know what levels and combinations of these agents may cause health effects, but since health complaints have been ignored, and studies have not been done, those levels are not defined.

People living in the wind farms need rights and protection.

As it stands, complaints are often ignored. There should be requirements for health care practitioners to report all health problems in wind farms, for investigations into complaints and for resolution of problems -not at the resident`s expense.

If neighbors suffer ill effects, turbines should be shut down until the problems are resolved.

It is beyond my comprehension that an individual farmer is allowed to make a decision to put up a power plant with a giant industrial turbine, atop a skyscraping tower, without community approval. The community suffers burdens and hazards because of that decision. It should be a decision of the entire community whom it affects.

If wind turbines are coming to the area, organizations such as Healthy Wind Wisconsin recommend documenting everything - property value, the views from one`s property, the wildlife that frequents one`s home, well water quality, noise levels on a clear calm night, health records, electrical pollution, and more. They recommend this because more problems and more lawsuits are anticipated as this virtually unregulated industry continues to grow.

The residents of a wind farm are not just being "stressed out" by the wind farm, there are physical forces acting on their bodies as a result of the wind farm, physical forces that may do permanent damage. If we were putting up nuclear power plants, and we had reports of animals around them not able to successfully reproduce or being born without eyeballs, and also had some people reporting an inability to conceive, we would halt any new construction until it had been studied. In wind farms, this is exactly what we are seeing.

I realize there may be technical difficulty in ascertaining the amount of vibration set up inside one`s body, but I am asking you to invoke the precautionary principle and suspend wind farm development until the reproductive effects of wind farms, here in Wisconsin, have been studied. If you move forward before studies have been done, people`s reproductive rights may be violated.

In March, when Governor Doyle signed a bill banning BPA in baby bottles and cups for children, he stated "It seems to me that if there is a question of (safety), the balance we should strike is on protecting our children."

I agree with Governor Doyle. I want my children protected. And people in the wind farm want to have children. Elderly people, stay-at-home moms, children, and babies are in these wind farms 24/7 being bathed in low frequency sound/infrasound, vibration and electrical pollution.

If we are going to err in the siting of wind turbines, it should be on the side of safety for the people.

Thank you for your consideration,

Lynne Knuth, Ph.D.

P.S. I attended the recent meeting with the Brown County Board of Health and Board of Human Services.

I wish everyone in this state had been able to hear the testimonials of the people who are suffering in industrial wind projects here in Wisconsin.

We live in the best country in the world, a country that cares about people, founded on the principle that all men are created equal and have equal rights under the law.

Each life is equally valuable.

To hear that the wind siting council referred to people suffering in wind farms as "collateral damage" is disturbing.Collateral damage may be unavoidable in military operations, but it is not acceptable in day to day life.

The life of each person suffering in a wind farm is as valuable as the life of each legislator living in Madison.

I`d like to see them switch places; then we`d get some wind farm legislation that makes sense.

If people are going to suffer because of a new technology, we do not move forward with it, but instead we come up with a better solution. There are better solutions to our country`s problems.

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

Lynne Knuth, PhD

Reedsville, WI

References:

Ahlbom IC, Cardis E, Green A, Linet M, Savitz D and Swerdlow A. ICNIRP (International Commission for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) Standing Committee on Epidemiology. Review of the epidemiologic literature on EMF and Health. Environ Health Perspect. 2001, Dec; 109 Suppl 6:911-33.

Angelillo IF, Villari P. Residential exposure to electromagnetic fields and childhood leukaemia: a meta-analysis. Bull World Health Organ 1999; 77 (11): 906 - 915

Al-Akhras MA Influence of 50 Hz magnetic field on sex hormones and body, uterine, and ovarian weights of adult female rats. Electromagn Biol Med. 2008; 27(2):155-63.

Alves-Pereira M. Castelo Branco NA. Vibroacoustic disease: biological effects of infrasound and low-frequency noise explained by mechanotransduction cellular signalling. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2007 Jan-Apr; 93(1-3):256-79. [Progress in biophysics and molecular biology]

Balichiyeva DV. Vibration in parental occupation as a risk factor in the health and development of offspring. Reprod Toxicol 1993 Sep-Oct;7(5):492-3

Briese V, Fanghänel J, Gasow H. Effect of pure sound and vibration on the embryonic development of the mouse. Zentralbl Gynakol. 1984; 106(6):379-88.

Brown KM, Doynov PG, Barber MK, Litovitz TL, Litovitz TA. Effects of extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields on chicken embryogenesis. Toxicologist 1992 Feb;12(1):100

Carpenter DO, Sage C. Setting prudent public health policy for electromagnetic field exposures. Rev Environ Health. 2008 Apr-Jun;23(2):91-117.

Celikler S, Aydemir N, Vatan O, Kurtuldu S, Bilaloglu R. A biomonitoring study of genotoxic risk to workers of transformers and distribution line stations. Int J Environ Health Res. 2009 Dec;19(6):421-30.

Coleman M, Beral V. A review of epidemiological studies of the health effects of living near or working with electricity generation and transmission equipment. : Int J Epidemiol. 1988, Mar; 17(1):1-13

Dolk H, Busby A, Armstrong BG, Walls PH. Geographical variation in anophthalmia and microphthalmia in England, 1988-94. BMJ. 1998, Oct 3; 317(7163):905-9; discussion 910. [BMJ (Clinical research ed.)]

Douglas, John. 1993. "Survey of residential magnetic field sources". EPRI Journal, April/May 1993, pp 19-25

Duane A. Dahlberg, Ph.D. Ground Currents An Important Factor in Electromagnetic Exposure.

Frey, B.J., and P.J. Haddon. Noise Radiation from Wind Turbines Installed Near Homes: Effects on Health. www.windturbinenoisehealthhumanrights.com. Feb, 2007.

Hardell L. Sage C. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public exposure standards. Biomed Pharmacother. 2008, Feb; 62(2):104-9.

Havas M. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: biological effects of dirty electricity with emphasis on diabetes and multiple sclerosis Electromagn Biol Med. 2006;25(4):259-68.Abstract

Electric Transmission Lines Individual Rights vs Utility Rights of Public Domain
By Donald Hillman, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Michigan State University.2005.

Kheifets L, Repacholi M, Saunders R, van Deventer E. The sensitivity of children to electromagnetic fields. Pediatrics. 2005, Aug; 116(2):e303-13.

Kim YW, Cho JY, Lee JS, Kang SH, Cho MK, Kim YM. Evaluation of fetal abnormalities in mice continuously exposed to 60 Hz electromagnetic fields for 6 months. Teratology 1999 May;59(5):29A-30A

Lahijani MS, Nojooshi SE, Siadat SF. Light and electron microscope studies of effects of 50 Hz electromagnetic fields on preincubated chick embryo. Electromagn Biol Med. 2007; 26(2):83-98. [Electromagnetic biology and medicine]

Li P, McLaughlin J, Infante-Rivard C. Maternal occupational exposure to extremely low frequency magnetic fields and the risk of brain cancer in the offspring. Cancer Causes Control. 2009, Aug; 20(6):945-55. [Cancer causes & control : CCC]

Luo Q, Yang J, Zeng QL, Zhu XM, Qian YL, Huang HF. 50-Hertz electromagnetic fields induce gammaH2AX foci formation in mouse preimplantation embryos in vitro. Biol Reprod. 2006, Nov; 75(5):673-80.

Marinova G, Svetoslavova E, Mateeva E. Industrial vibrations and their repercussions on the basic functions of the genital system in women Akush Ginekol (Sofiia). 1976; 15(1):74-8. [Akusherstvo i ginekologiia]

Nakamura H, Ohsu W, Nagase H, Okazawa T, Yoshida M, Okada A. Uterine circulatory dysfunction induced by whole-body vibration and its endocrine pathogenesis in the pregnant rat. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1996;72(4):292-6.

Oliveira MJ, Pereira AS, Castelo Branco NA, Grande NR, Aguas AP. In utero and postnatal exposure of Wistar rats to low frequency/high intensity noise depletes the tracheal epithelium of ciliated cells. Lung. 2001; 179(4):225-32.

Pearce MS, Hammal DM, Dorak MT, McNally RJ, Parker L. Paternal occupational exposure to electro-magnetic fields as a risk factor for cancer in children and young adults: a case-control study from the North of England.
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2007, Sep; 49(3):280-6.

Penkov A. Influence of occupational vibration on the female reproductive system and function.

Akush Ginekol (Sofiia). 2007; 46(3):44-8. [Akusherstvo i ginekologiia]

Seidel, H. Selected health risks caused by long-term, whole-body vibration. AM J Ind Med. 1993, Apr:23(4):589-604

Silva MJ; Carothers A; Castelo Branco NA; Dias A; Boavida MG. Sister chromatid exchange analysis in workers exposed to noise and vibration. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1999, Mar; 70(3 Pt 2):A40-5.

Silva MJ; Dias A; Barreta A; Nogueira PJ; Castelo-Branco NA; Boavida MG. Low frequency noise and whole-body vibration cause increased levels of sister chromatid exchange in splenocytes of exposed mice. Teratog Carcinog Mutagen. 2002; 22(3):195-203

SAVE THE DATE: The PSC will be holding public hearings for the wind sitting rules on

Monday, June 28 @ 1PM & 6PM in Fond Du Lac at the City Hall on 160 S. Macy Street

Tuesday, June 29 @ 1PM & 6PM at Holiday Inn in Tomah on 1017 E. McCoy Blvd.

Wednesday, June 30 at the PSC in Madison on 610 North Whitney Way, 1pm and 6pm

The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin has scheduled several hearings throughout the state regarding the creation of statewide wind turbine regulations.

The new regulations apply to wind farms that will generate less than 100 Megawatts of power. Specifics about turbine height, noise and distance setbacks, shadow flicker, signal interference and when residents and government agencies must be notified about proposed projects are included in the 53-page document.

To view the document, go to www.psc.wi.gov, enter docket number 1-AC-231 into the case search bar and download the document titled “Notice of Hearings” with the Public Service Commission reference number 131882.

Comments are due on Wednesday, July 7, 2010 at noon and must be mailed to: Sandra J. Paske, Secretary to the Commission, Public Service Commission, P.O. Box 7854, Madison, Wis., 53707-7854.

Comments can also be faxed to (608) 266-3957 and are due by Tuesday, July 6, 2010 at noon.

Online comments can be submitted at http://psc.wi.gov using docket number 1-AC-231.

 "Evidence does not support the conclusion that wind turbines cause or are associated with adverse health outcomes" 

-Dr. Jevon McFadden, Extended Report, Page 74

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD:

 As we begin our closer look at Wind Siting Council member Dr. McFadden's presentation regarding wind turbine impacts on human health, we note a reference to this paper authored by Wolfgang Babisch (among others) about annoyance and noise:

  Annoyance due to aircraft noise has increased over the years–results of the HYENA study. Environ Intl. 2009;35:1169-1176.

It is interesting to note that Dr. McFadden does not reference any of the following papers by the same author regarding noise and human health. Babisch is a senior research officer at the German Federal Environmental Agency. His research focus is on noise epidemiology, particularly the auditory and nonauditory health effects of noise. He is a member of the International Commission on Biological Effects of Noise.

Our source for papers authored or co-authored by Babisch

Click on each of the following titles to read the reports

Transportation noise and cardiovascular risk: updated review and synthesis of epidemiological studies indicate that the evidence has increased.

Acute effects of night-time noise exposure on blood pressure in populations living near airports.

Noise-Induced Endocrine Effects and Cardiovascular Risk.

Road traffic noise and cardiovascular risk

Traffic Noise and Cardiovascular Disease: Epidemiological Review and Synthesis.

Exposure-response relationship of the association between aircraft noise and the risk of hypertension.

Hypertension and exposure to noise near airports: the HYENA study.

Saliva cortisol and exposure to aircraft noise in six European countries.

Blood pressure of 8-14 year old children in relation to traffic noise at home--results of the German Environmental Survey for Children (GerES IV).

The environmental health of children: priorities in Europe.

PINCHE's policy recommendations on noise: how to prevent noise from adversely affecting children.

Noise and health.

Health aspects of extra-aural noise research.

Health status as a potential effect modifier of the relation between noise annoyance and incidence of ischaemic heart disease.

Stress hormones in the research on cardiovascular effects of noise.

The Noise/Stress Concept, Risk Assessment and Research Needs.

[Health-related aspects of research on noise effects other than on the ear]

Increased catecholamine levels in urine in subjects exposed to road traffic noise: the role of stress hormones in noise research.

Traffic noise and cardiovascular risk: the Caerphilly and Speedwell studies, third phase--10-year follow up.

Subjective work noise: a major risk factor in myocardial infarction.

Traffic noise and cardiovascular risk: the Speedwell study, first phase. Outdoor noise levels and risk factors.

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: What does shadow flicker look like?

Below are three recent videos taken in Fond du Lac and Dodge County showing shadow flicker.

The first video is from a wind project home in Fond du Lac County which gets shadow flicker in the morning and in the evening. Family members in this home have the option of pulling down all the shades or going into the basement until it passes. Remaining in a room being hit by shadow flicker is not an option.

Click on image below to see shadow flicker filmed on May 4th, 2010 in Butler Ridge wind project near Iron Ridge Wisconsin in Dodge County

Click on image below to see shadow flicker in the Invenergy Forward Energy project near the Town of Byron in Fond du Lac County

SECOND FEATURE:

WIND FARMS WILL HARM HEALTH, ACCORDING TO DOCTOR

SOURCE: Barton Chronicle

Chris Braithwaite

May 12, 2010

MONTPELIER — A doctor who has studied the health effects of a commercial wind power project in northern Maine brought his conclusion to the State House Friday morning, May 7.

“There is absolutely no doubt that people living within 3,500 feet of a ridge line arrangement of 1.5 megawatts or larger turbines in a rural environment will suffer negative effects.”

The conclusion is in a statement distributed at Dr. Michael Nissenbaum’s press conference, held in the middle of one of the busiest days of this year’s legislative session.

Click on the image above to watch a presentation by Dr. Michael Nissenbaum on wind turbines and health impacts.

His statement is of local interest because, in terms of both size and distance, it would apply to the proposed wind project on Lowell Mountain.

Green Mountain Power is seeking permission to erect up to 24 towers with a capacity of 2.5 or 3 megawatts each. And GMP has said the towers would be at least 3,000 feet from the nearest homes. (Exceptions are the home of the resident who would host most of the project, and a hunting camp that GMP overlooked until it was drawn to the company’s attention.)

For projects on a ridge line, Dr. Nissenbaum said Friday, turbines should be 7,000 feet from homes, at a minimum. (That would be well over a mile, which equals 5,280 feet.)

The doctor said his findings, which are disputed by the wind industry, are based on interviews with 22 of about 30 adults who live within 3,500 feet of a ridge line arrangement of 1.5 megawatt turbines in Mars Hill, Maine.

As reported in this newspaper, people who live near that project began to complain about the noise it made shortly after it began to operate.

Of those 22 people, Dr. Nissenbaum found, 18 reported new or worsened chronic sleep deprivation, nine reported new chronic headaches, 13 reported stress, and 17 reported persistent anger. More than a third reported new or worsened depression, and all but one of them said the quality of their life had been reduced.

Such problems did not appear in a parallel study of a control sample of 27 people living about three miles away from the project, Dr. Nissenbaum reported.

The problem, the doctor said, is that would-be wind power developers employ sound engineers who use standard instruments to measure sound levels in the normal range that the human ear detects most easily.

“The devil is in the details,” said the doctor, who for two years has focused on the physics and potential for adverse health effect of the energy emission related to industrial wind turbines. That statement comes from an introduction to Dr. Nissenbaum distributed by Energize Vermont, the group that brought him to the press conference, and to a forum in Rutland the day before.

While the experts work in terms of pure stead sounds, the doctor said, the turbines emit a complex tone which “is registered as louder than a pure tone, and is more effective in waking you up.”

Using a recording to demonstrate, he said that the turbines emit a pulsing sound, which again can affect he listener more than a steady tone.

Low-frequency sounds seem ominous to people, he said. “As humans we’re evolutionarily wired, and there’s some indication that low-frequency noises indicate threats.”

Low-frequency sounds can cause structural elements in houses to vibrate, and amplify the effect, Dr. Nissenbaum said.

He showed a photo of a tent in the backyard of a home that sits in the middle of a large wind project in Ontario. The resident moved into the tent so shoe could sleep, Dr. Nissenbaum said. That would make no sense, he added, unless being inside the house made the sound worse. He quoted from the resident’s journal: “The house is humming again tonight.”

The woman moved away fromt he project after the wind developer bought her home. Her story was detailed in the Chronicle in December 2009. [Also see: "Low-frequency sound, stray voltage, are suspects in ill effects of wind turbines".]

People who can’t sleep get sick, Dr. Nissenbaum said, and some people find the throbbing sound of wind turbines particularly annoying — “a plane that never lands.”

“Annoyance leads to sleep deprivation illness as day follows night,” the doctor said.

The worst part of it, he added, is when people are offered psychological help to deal with their problems with wind turbine noise. Such people don’t need a psychologist, Dr. Nissenbaum said, “they need the turbines placed farther away from their home.”

One of the few legislators at Friday’s press conference was Representative Rachel Weston, a Democrat from Burlington.

She said she had moved to the city from a small town, and gradually grown accustomed to a variety of urban sounds.

People can get habituated to some sounds, Dr. Nissenbaum said. “But there’s something unique about wind turbine noise that prevents habituation. There is something unique about those lower-frequency noises.

The doctor was talking about individual perception, Ms. Weston argued, not about science.“It’s not about my perceptions,” she said. “It’s about the physiology of my body.”

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

Will residents of Wisconsin wind projects be heard?

SPOILER ALERT: Because of the composition of the WSC , the Research Nerd predicts the interests of the wind developers, utilities, and wind lobbyists will win out over the protection of the people and bats and birds of rural Wisconsin who will be living with the fallout of wind development.

Unless--- by some miracle---the PSC Horton Hears a Rural Wisconsin Who. The PSC Commissioners, particularly Lauren Azar, have made it clear that the do want to hear from you.

If you'd like to make your voice heard, CLICK HERE to leave a public comment on the Wind Siting Council Docket. What you post will become public record. There is no limit to the number of posts you can make. You are free to post opinion, articles, documents, and video links. Anything that you would like the wind siting council to consider.