Click on the images below to watch wind turbine shadow flicker in the 36 turbine Butler Ridge project in Dodge County, Wisconsin. Each turbine in this video is 400 feet tall. Filmed on the morning of May 4th, 2010 en route to a Wind Siting Council meeting hosted at the home of council member Larry Wusch who lives in the Invenergy Forward Energy project located about twenty miles north of Butler Ridge.
This turbine in this video emitted a high pitched whistle as well as low pulsing jet sounds.
This video shows how long the turbine shadows are, and what shadow flicker looks like when it covers a field, a house and a barn
THE NEXT WIND SITING COUNCIL MEETING IS CANCELLED FOR 9AM WEDNESDAY MAY 12 2010 AT THE PSC
NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: For some, watching a Wind Siting Council Meeting is like watching paint dry. For others it's like watching people toss your future around in their hands. For the BPWI Research Nerd (who is working on a book about the experiences of wind farm residents in our state) it's a front row seat on the creation of siting standards that will either protect the people and avian species of our state, or protect the interests of wind developers, utilities and wind lobbyists.
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.
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.
It's Better Plan's understanding that though some of the council members do pay attention to the docket, there is no requirement that the council read any of the posts.
WHAT'S ON THE WSC DOCKET TODAY?
This "energy sprawl" of giant turbines and pylons will require far greater amounts of concrete and steel than conventional power plants—figure on anywhere from 870 to 956 cubic feet of concrete per megawatt of electricity and 460 tons of steel (32 times more concrete and 139 times as much steel as a gas-fired plant).
ON THE WSC DOCKET: Better Plan thanks Curt Hilgenberg and Julie Bixby-Wendt for taking the time to post to the docket.
This Post from Curt Hilgenberg, Town of Holland, Brown County includes an article about wind power By Robert Bryce in the Wall Street Journal. The quote above is from Bruce's book, "Power Hungry", released in April.
March 1, 2010 by Robert Bryce in Wall Street Journal
People living near turbines increasingly report sleep deprivation, headaches and vertigo. The wind lobby says there's no proof
Imagine this scenario: The oil and gas industry launches an aggressive global drilling program with a new type of well. Thousands of these new wells, once operational, emit a noxious odor so offensive that many of the people living within a mile of them are kept awake at night. Some are even forced to move out of their homes. It's easy to predict the reaction: denunciations of the industry, countless lawsuits, and congressional investigations.
Now substitute wind for oil and gas and consider the noise complaints being lodged against wind projects around the world.
The Obama administration has made the increased use of wind power to generate electricity a top priority. In 2009 alone, U.S. wind generation capacity increased by 39%. But more wind power means more giant turbines closer to more people. And if current trends continue, that spells trouble.
In 2007, a phalanx of wind turbines were built around Charlie Porter's property in rural northern Missouri. Soon, Mr. Porter began to have trouble sleeping. So did his wife and daughter. The noise, he told me, made sleeping almost impossible. "We tried everything-earplugs, leaving the TV station on all night." Nothing worked. Late last year he moved his family off their 20-acre farm.
Mr. Porter's story is no isolated event. Rural residents in Texas, Maine, Pennsylvania, Oregon, New York, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, France and England have been complaining about the noise from wind turbines, particularly about sleep deprivation.
Dozens of news stories-most of them published in rural newspapers-have documented the problem.
I've spoken to nine other people in New York, Wisconsin, Ontario, New Zealand, Nova Scotia and England who live, or lived, near wind turbines. All complained of the noise, with sleep deprivation being the most common complaint. For example, Janet Warren, who raises sheep near Makara, New Zealand, told me via email that the turbines near her home emit "continuous noise and vibration," which disturb her sleep and are causing "loss of concentration, irritability, and short-term memory effects."
Complaints about sleep disruption-as well as the deleterious health effects caused by the pulsing, low-frequency noise emitted by the giant turbines-are a central element of an emerging citizen backlash against the booming global wind industry.
Lawsuits that focus on noise pollution are now pending in Maine, Pennsylvania and New Zealand. In New Zealand, more than 750 complaints have been lodged against a large wind project near Makara since it began operating last April. The European Platform Against Windfarms lists 388 groups in 20 European countries. Canada has more than two dozen antiwind groups. In the U.S. there are about 100 such groups, and state legislators in Vermont recently introduced a bill that will require wind turbines be located no closer than 1.25 miles from any residence.
In theory, big wind projects should only be built in desolate areas. But the reality is that many turbines are being installed close to homes. Wind developers put a turbine within 550 meters of Mr. Porter's house. Hal Graham, a retired office manager in Cohocton, N.Y., complains about the noise pollution caused by a turbine 300 meters from his home. Tony Moyer, a plumbing superintendent in Eden, Wis., grumbles about the noise generated by three turbines built within 425 meters of his house.
Doctors and acoustics experts from the U.S. to Australia report a raft of symptoms that they blame on wind turbine noise, including sleep disturbance, headaches and vertigo. Dr. Nina Pierpont, a pediatrician in Malone, N.Y., has studied 36 people affected by wind turbine noise since 2004 at her own expense.
The people she interviewed were widely dispersed; they lived in the U.S., Canada, England, Ireland and Italy. She found that the collection of symptoms she calls "wind turbine syndrome" disappeared as soon as people moved out of their noise-affected homes and into new locations at least five miles from any turbines.
Across the border, Ontario-based orthopedic surgeon Dr. Robert McMurtry has been researching wind turbine noise for the past 18 months. Dr. McMurtry, a fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, counts more than 100 people in Ontario he believes are experiencing adverse effects from turbine noise. "It has compromised their health," he says.
The wind lobby has publicly rejected these claims. In December, the American Wind Energy Association in conjunction with the Canadian Wind Energy Association, issued a report titled "Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects: An Expert Review Panel."
It declared: "There is no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects." It also suggested that some of the symptoms being attributed to wind turbine noise were likely psychosomatic and asserted that the vibrations from the turbines are "too weak to be detected by, or to affect, humans."
Yet the report also noted that in "the area of wind turbine health effects, no case-control or cohort studies have been conducted as of this date." True enough-but it means there are no studies to prove or disprove the case. It also says that "a small number of sensitive people" may be "stressed" by wind turbine noise and suffer sleep deprivation. But who gets to define "sensitive" and "small number"? And if turbine noise and sleep disturbance aren't problems, then why are people in so many different locations complaining in almost identical ways? Such questions are only going to be pressed with more urgency in the future.
By 2030, environmental and lobby groups are pushing for the U.S. to produce 20% of its electricity from wind. According to the Department of Energy, meeting that goal will require the U.S. to have about 300,000 megawatts of wind capacity, an eightfold increase over current levels. Installing tens of thousands of new turbines inevitably means they'll be located closer to populated areas.
The health effects of low-frequency noise on humans are not well understood. The noise in question often occurs at, or below, decibel levels that are commonly considered a public nuisance. And detecting low-frequency noise requires sophisticated acoustic gear. For all of these reasons, this issue should be investigated. If policy makers are serious about considering all of the impacts of "green" energy, then an impartial, international study of the effects of wind turbine noise should be undertaken without delay.
Mr. Bryce is the managing editor of Energy Tribune. His fourth book, "Power Hungry: The Myths of 'Green' Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future," will be published in April by PublicAffairs.
Web link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487042...
POST TO THE WSC DOCKET FROM
Julie Bixby-Wendt
Greenleaf, Wisconsin
Submitted May 8, 2010
Below are my comments that I emailed to Fox 11 and other news stations, newspapers and State representatives:
I watched your story about the "Wind Wars" going on in the Town of Morrison. I am a resident of the town and wondered if you are aware that property owners who have vacant land next to a property owner who has signed an easement for a wind turbine are receiving absolutely no compensation, even though they are basically taking away 500 feet of our land at every side where a turbine will be placed, because the 1,000-foot setback is from a dwelling rather than the property line.
My husband and I own 40 acres of vacant land. There are proposed wind turbines on property next to at least two sides of our land, and they only have to be 500 feet away from our property.
We have kept this property with the intention that our children might someday build their homes on this land. Because any dwelling will have to be placed 1,000 feet away from a turbine, they are effectively taking away at least 500 feet of our land without any compensation to us.
If they make the setbacks from a dwelling larger, that will mean more of our property will be stolen from us. What happened to our encroachment rights?
Every time I hear someone say how much money this wind farm could bring to property owners, it makes me very upset!
I would like to hear someone reporting on how our state and the power companies are stealing from property owners and shoving these wind turbines down our throats! They should have to get a vote from a town as to whether or not they would like to host a wind farm before they can even come into a town and sneak around getting easements from anyone who will sign up.
Also, even though the people in our town have to live with the wind turbines, the town will receive less money than the county for having them here (town gets 1/3, county gets 2/3).
Even their sneaking around is underhanded.
We were approached to host a wind turbine and were told all of our neighbors were signing up so we might as well get in on the action. They even mentioned names of our neighboring property owners who had signed up, so we were somewhat interested...until I took the contract to an attorney who told me it was a terrible contract.
So now, because we are not hosting a turbine we are not receiving any money, and they are taking some of our land anyway because the setbacks are not the same from the property line as from a dwelling. This just isn't right!
Besides the actions our town is taking (apparently the state has made it impossible for a town to do much against wind turbines), we just don`t know who to contact who can help us, and others like us, who are being robbed.
I don`t know when alternative energy became more important than people, but our government is definitely not standing up for the people. If you have any suggestions as to where we can get help with this, it would be deeply appreciated!
I affirm that these comments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Julie Bixby-Wendt
Want to keep up with what's going on with the wind siting council? For some it's like watching paint dry, for others it's watching people toss your future around in their hands
A proposal for We Energies to buy two homes in the vicinity of a soon-to-be-built wind farm is the only thing standing in the way of building the roads that, a year from now, will lead to a vast collection of wind energy turbines in northeast Columbia County.
At Thursday's meeting of the Columbia County Board's highway committee, officials of the county and We Energies signed an agreement that will require the utility to pay for the repair of any county roads that might be damaged during the construction.
We Energies plans to build, on land leased from farmers in the towns of Scott and Randolph, up to 90 wind turbines, capable of generating up to 207 megawatts of electric power. The development, called Glacier Hills Energy Park, could become the largest wind energy operation in Wisconsin.
Mike Strader of We Energies said Thursday that the company hopes to soon start building the gravel roads to the turbine sites, to offer access for maintenance.
But before that can happen, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin has to sign off on a plan for We Energies to buy two homes located near the proposed sites of numerous turbines.
Strader said the purchase would not be an eminent domain taking. Rather, it's intended to fulfill one of the conditions that the PSC set forth when it voted in January to grant a certificate of public convenience and necessity for Glacier Hills.
According to documents filed with the PSC, the commission required We Energies to "reduce the individual hardships" for two specific households whose homes are located close to an especially large number of proposed turbine locations. One option for doing that - and, according to the documents, the option preferred by We Energies and both households - is for the utility to buy the homes.
PSC Engineer Scot Cullen said Thursday that the commission is expected to decide on the matter soon. Commission approval is needed before either sale can be closed, he said.
From Columbia County's perspective, however, the agreement regarding the roads clears the way for the work to begin.
Highway Commissioner Kurt Dey said Corporation Counsel Joseph Ruf had looked over the agreement, which basically calls for We Energies to make repairs, or pay for repairs, whenever the utility's construction activity results in damage to a county road.
"I think we're ready to go," he told the committee.
When the highway committee met April 1, Andrew Hesselbach of We Energies said the weight of the construction equipment, and not the turbines themselves, is most likely to cause damage. The turbine and tower components, though heavy, are hauled on several axles, he said.
The turbines, which could be as high as 400 feet from the ground to the tip of the highest blade, aren't scheduled to be built until the spring and summer of 2011.
Walter "Doc" Musekamp of We Energies said Thursday that, in addition to the roads that will lead to the turbines, one of the first things to be built will be the wind farm's operations building on Columbia County Highway H, south of Highway 33.
SHABBONA TOWNSHIP – Officials at NextEra Energy Resources aren’t sure what caused one of the three blades on a wind turbine south of the village of Shabbona to fail Friday morning. The 131-foot-long blade hung from the top of the turbine Friday, apparently bent at the base and split along its length.
A 131-foot-long turbine blade was damaged in the wind farm south of Shabbona.
That type of failure is unusual, NextEra spokesman Steve Stengel said.
“Our inspection at this point has just been visual, so at this point we don’t know what caused that,” Stengel said Friday afternoon. “Based on just visual inspection, it’s very unusual to have a blade fail and look like that.”
Stengel said the blade failed about 7:30 a.m. Friday. No one was injured and nothing besides the blade was damaged, he said. The turbine has been shut down.
The access road leading from Houghtby Road to that section of the 145-tower commercial wind farm was blocked off with orange cones and traffic barricades Friday. Stengel said NextEra is in the process of getting a replacement blade and arranging for a crane to repair the turbine so it can go back online after the cause of the failure has been determined.
Several vehicles pulled to the side of Houghtby Road while their occupants looked at the broken turbine Friday. One of those looking was Mel Hass, a member of a citizens group that filed a lawsuit last year opposing the wind farm.
Hass said he came to look at the turbine after getting a call that it had failed, and he had wondered if it was somehow damaged in a Thursday night thunderstorm.
Safety Measures Implemented to Keep Public out of ‘Collapse Zone’
By Martha E. Conway
(Fenner) Enel Energy officials announced in March that heightened safety measures would be taken in light of the collapse of a windmill in the Fenner Wind Farm on Buyea Road Dec. 27.
“When the incident occurred, we fenced it off and set up security,” said Hank Sennott, director of corporate affairs and communications for Enel North America, Inc., out of Andover, Mass.
Now Enel is fencing off every turbine, Sennott said. He said with all the snow that stuck around this winter, it was difficult for anyone to get to the turbines, but with it gone, the company is erecting snow fencing to demarcate the “safety zone.”
“We are exercising an abundance of caution,” Sennott said. “The public has gotten use to having pretty liberal access to these turbines. We also needed to stake out the space before farmers begin working their fields.”
One of the things that made leasing so attractive to farmers was that they could work the land virtually up to the base of the windmill towers. Now Sennott says compensatory agreements will be made for the loss of use of the cropland unavailable inside the 300-foot radius – about the height of each windmill – staked out around each turbine.
The decision was made after concrete core samples from the foundations preliminarily showed inconsistent aging and degradation.
“Some of the samples looked like they were poured yesterday,” Sennott said. “Others… Didn’t.”
According to Sennott the samples of five or six foundations led to the decision to test all 19 in the project. He said the company is in the home stretch of collecting data and a report is expected soon.
Surveyors also are working the site to make sure towers are not moving, Sennott said.
“The last thing we want to do is have something happen,” Sennott said, adding that also is the motivation behind not hurrying to restart the turbines.
Sennott said he doesn’t know how much revenue is being lost each day the turbines don’t turn; he said he hopes the company can pull back the fences quickly and Enel’s expectation is that the turbines will be up and running by the fall.
“I don’t know of any turbine foundation failures, but we were the first, so there is nothing to go back and research,” Sennott said. “This project was the larges built east of the Mississippi when we constructed it 10 years ago. There’s no history for us to look at.”
Sennott said how much location may play into the problem is still a big unknown.
“That’s why we’re being overly cautious,” Sennott said. “Maybe we’ll look back and think it was excessive, but we would rather go overboard on the side of safety. We’ve never had any incidents, and we’ve never had anything like this ever happen.”
The top windmill engineering firm in the world is working on the investigation and report, Sennott said, and subcontractors who helped construct the project also are assisting.
“It’s been a real collective effort to try and sort this out,” Sennott said. “Everyone’s stepped up to the plate.”
Sennott said the community pride in the wind farm has been unparalleled.
“We can’t go anywhere without people tapping us on the shoulder, asking us when they are going to be started again,” Sennott said. “It shows that people are interested and care. There is real community pride in this project. Everybody’s been great. You don’t know how it feels to visit the Fenner website and see our turbines there. That really says it all.”
About the Fenner Wind Farm
The Fenner Windpower Project consists of 20 wind turbines, each with a capacity of 1.5 megawatts for a total installed capacity of 30 megawatts. Each wind turbine generator consists of a concrete foundation, a 213-foot-tall tubular steel tower, a 231-foot diameter, three-bladed rotor connected to a gearbox and generator, and an electrical control center to automatically operate the system.
The towers are 13.5 feet in diameter at the base and 8.5 feet at the top. The total height of each tower with blade extended is 328 feet; each blade is 113 feet long.
Each turbine weighs 380,000 pounds; the concrete foundation for each tower weighs more than 610,000 pounds. Access to the top of the tower is made by use of a vertical ladder located inside each tower.
The project is located in the town of Fenner, about 20 miles east of Syracuse in Madison County. The project encompasses about 2,000 acres of leased land running from the intersection of Mile Strip and Bellinger Roads in the North to the intersection of Buyea and East Roads in the south.
Two additional wind turbines and the electrical substation are located south of the intersection of Peterboro and Rouses roads, east of the main project site. Electricity produced by the windmills is transmitted to the National Grid power grid.
Construction began in June 2001 and was completed in November of that year.
If you're prone to motion sickness, don't click on the image below.
THE NEXT WIND SITING COUNCIL MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR 9AM TUESDAY MAY 4 2010 IN FOND DU LAC COUNTY
Council members and public will visit the home of WSC member Larry Wunsch in Invenergy's Forward Energy wind project.
Following this, Council Member Andrew Hesselbach from WE Energies will host a tour of the Blue Sky Green Field project which he helped to bring about as project manager.
NOTICE OF COUNCIL TOURS Wind Siting Council Docket 1-AC-231
9:AM Tour of Wunsch Property W6976 County Road F Brownsville, WI 53006
Itinerary 1) Meet at and tour Wunsch Property 2) Meet at and tour Blue Sky Green Field Wind Project
Note from the BPWI Research Nerd: This will be an open meeting and subject to open meeting rules. The public is allowed to attend, observe, and record the proceedings but cannot participate or speak to council members while the meeting is in session. The Nerd hopes to see you there.
LAST Wednesday was International Noise Awareness Day, but if you missed it, you weren’t alone. Begun in New York 15 years ago as a grass-roots effort to educate people about the harmful health effects of excessive noise, Noise Awareness Day rapidly gained attention and advocates around the world. Gradually, though, America’s enthusiasm for the day began to abate. This year, in New York City, a mobile unit offered free hearing tests behind City Hall — that was about it for one of the noisiest cities on earth.
The scale of our noise problem isn’t in doubt. In recent years rigorous studies on the health consequences of noise have indicated that noise elevates heart rate, blood pressure, vasoconstriction and stress hormone levels, and increases risk for heart attacks. These reports prove that even when we’ve become mentally habituated to noise, the damage it does to our physiologies continues unchecked.
Studies done on sleeping subjects show that signs of stress surge in response to noise like air traffic even when people don’t wake. Moderate noise from white-noise machines, air-conditioners and background television, for example, can still undermine children’s language acquisition. Warnings about playing Walkmans and iPods too loudly have been around for years, but some experts now believe that even at reasonable volumes a direct sound-feed into the ears for hours on end may degrade our hearing.
Yet by focusing on the issue exclusively from a negative perspective, in a world awash with things to worry about, we may just be adding to the public’s sense of self-compassion fatigue. Rather than rant about noise, we need to create a passionate case for silence.
Evidence for the benefits of silence continues to mount. Studies have demonstrated that silent meditation improves practitioners’ ability to concentrate. Teachers able to introduce silence into classrooms report that it fosters learning and reflection among overstimulated students. Professionals involved with conflict resolution have found that by incorporating times of silence into negotiations they’ve been able to foster empathy that inspires a peaceable end to disputes. The old idea of quiet zones around hospitals has found new validation in studies linking silence and healing. These are macro benefits, but often silence feels good on a purely animal level.
If you have the means, you buy your luxury silence in the form of spa time, or products like quiet vacuums, which are always more expensive than their roaring bargain cousins. The affluent pay for boutique silence because, like silk on the flesh and wine on the palate, silence can kindle a sensory delight.
Unfortunately, in a world of diminishing natural retreats and amplifying electronic escapes, this delight is in ever shorter supply. The days when Thoreau could write of silence as “a universal refuge” and “inviolable asylum” are gone. With all our gadgetry punching up the volume at home, in entertainment zones and even places of worship, young people today often lack any haven for quiet.
These problems are everywhere, but can be especially acute in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Too many people think of silence only in terms of “being silenced,” of suppressing truth. In consequence, silence itself is now often suppressed.
People who appreciate the values of silence have, by and large, done a poor job of sharing their understanding — let alone of actually making silence more democratically accessible. Yet silence can be nourished in our larger spaces not just by way of an inward journey most people lack the tools to embark upon, but through education and architecture.
Some of the imaginative work being done today by urban planners involved with soundscaping demonstrates that it’s easier to create oases of quiet — by, for example, creating common areas on the rear sides of buildings with plantings that absorb sound — than it is to lower the volume of a larger area by even a few decibels. And having access to these oases can greatly enhance quality of life.
A recent Swedish study found that even people who live in loud neighborhoods report a 50 percent drop in their general noise annoyance levels if residential buildings have a quiet side. These modest sanctuaries can provide at least a taste of silence, which is then recognized not to be silence at all, but the sounds of the larger world we inhabit: birdsong and footsteps, water, voices and wind.
Perhaps rather than observing a muted Noise Awareness Day, next year we should declare the whole of April to be International Silence Awareness Month: an opportunity to think about how to bring a positive experience of silence to the growing numbers of people who live in a relentless wave of sound. Even a little bit of silence can create a sense of connection with our environment that diminishes alienation, and prompts a desire to discover more quiet.
George Prochnik is the author, most recently, of “In Pursuit of Silence.”
NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: The World Health Organizations says nighttime noise levels should be kept to 35 decibels and below to insure healthy sleep. The PSC has approved noise levels of 50 decibels for wind projects in our state.
THIRD FEATURE: WHAT'S ON THE DOCKET?
Want to keep up with what's going on with the wind siting council? For some it's like watching paint dry, for others it's watching people toss your future around in their hands
This from Brown County Resident, Joanne Vercauteren
Everyday someone is writing and telling you that the setbacks have to be farther away from the nonparticipants property line, well I`m going to say it again.
To do the right thing for everyone involved in these projects you most have some consideration for the nonparticipants. We pay for the property and we pay the taxes on it, so we should have a little bit to say how close we want something to our property line.
I know the host have their rights also as our town board keeps reminding, but they have no rights putting the turbines so close to our homes and property. If they need the money that bad that they have to go behind closed doors and sign contracts without talking to their neighbors to see how they feel, then let them put these things as close to their homes and families as necessary to get them at least ½ mile if not farther from our homes,families and property lines.
That would be the fair thing to do. ½ mile is not a lot to ask, seeming other countries are putting them 1 mile away from nonparticipants property lines, because of health and safety reasons.
Between now and September the people in the town of Glenmore are going to know what it feels like to live among the turbines. Some people that are going to have these things real close to their new homes are starting to speak up, but it`s too late, because their town chairman told them at meetings that these were government regulated, but actually they are not.
The town`s people could have stopped the project it they would have been told the tru[th]. I feel sorry for them, but we tried to explain it at one of their meetings and the board said there is no more discussion on turbines, because there is nothing we can do, the government wants these.
So I guess either their town board was lied to or they just didn`t care enough to really check into it out. Money always rules!
This is how things are happening now, so that is why you have the job to make it right for all people involved with the turbine projects.
I do not thin[k] these wind turbine are a good fit for our communities that are highly populated, you sure wouldn`t think about putting them right downtown among the homes and business there, so why are our communities any different.
We have homes, schools,churches and business too! The companies that are pushing these turbines most likely disagree with a 1/2 mile setback, but then again they are just in it for the money, they do not care about anyone else`s feeling.
Maybe if they would listen to people who have to live with these things everyday they would understand, but instead they just turn their backs on them and try to pay them to be quiet.
Why don`t you take a week like a few of us suggested and live in the turbine farm and also talk to some of the people who have wrote about their lives living with the turbines in their backyards, then maybe you could understand where we are coming from asking for the setback to be no less them ½ mile from our property lines.
These setbacks will hopefully keep our families , friends and neighbors safe from any health effects that these wind turbines may cause. I'm hoping you take our letters in to consideration when you make you final draft.
Respectfully submitted
Joanne Vercauteren
Town of Morrison
May 2, 2019
FEATURE NUMBER FOUR: From the Better Plan Vaults:
What's the connection between noise and coronary heart disease? What do wind turbines have to do with any of this?
According to the results of a new peer-reviewed study made available to us by the U.S. government's National Institutes of Health, the connection between noise and coronary heart disease -particularly at night- is serious.
Our wind energy ordinances must include a top limit for how much turbine noise can safely be added to our environment. The wind industry and the Wisconsin Draft Model Ordinance tell us 50 decibles is safe. This article by M. Nathaniel Mead helps us understand why this is not enough protection.
NOISE POLLUTION: THE SOUND BEHIND HEART EFFECTS
More than 15 million Americans currently have some form of coronary heart disease (CHD), which involves a narrowing of the small blood vessels that supply blood and oxygen to the heart. Risk factors for CHD include diabetes, high blood pressure, altered blood lipids, obesity, smoking, menopause, and inactivity. To this list we can now add noise, thanks to a recent study and assessment of the evidence by the WHO Noise Environmental Burden on Disease working group. The findings, first presented at the Internoise 2007 conference in August 2007, will be published in December.
“The new data indicate that noise pollution is causing more deaths from heart disease than was previously thought,” says working group member Deepak Prasher, a professor of audiology at University College in London—perhaps hundreds of thousands around the world. “Until now, the burden of disease related to the general population’s exposure to environmental noise has rarely been estimated in nonoccupational settings at the international level.”
The separate noise-related working group first convened in 2003 and began sifting through data from studies in European countries to derive preliminary estimates of the impact of noise on the entire population of Europe. They then sought to separate the noise-related health effects from those of traffic-related air pollution and other confounding factors such as physical inactivity and smoking. In 2007, the group published Quantifying Burden of Disease from Environmental Noise, their preliminary findings on the health-related effects of noise for Europeans. Their conclusion: about 2% of Europeans suffer severely disturbed sleep, and 15% suffer severe annoyance due to environmental noise, defined as community noise emitted from sources such as road traffic, trains, and aircraft.
According to the new figures, long-term exposure to traffic noise may account for approximately 3% of CHD deaths (or about 210,000 deaths) in Europe each year. To obtain the new estimates, the working group compared households with abnormally high noise exposure with those with quieter homes. They also reviewed epidemiologic data on heart disease and hypertension, and then integrated these data into maps showing European cities with different levels of environmental noise.
The noise threshold for cardiovascular problems was determined to be a chronic nighttime exposure of at least 50 A-weighted decibels, the noise level of light traffic. Daytime noise exposures also correlated with health problems, but the risk tended to increase during the nighttime hours. “Many people become habituated to noise over time,” says Prasher. “The biological effects are imperceptible, so that even as you become accustomed to the noise, adverse physiological changes are nevertheless taking place, with potentially serious consequences to human health.”
To further assess the noise-related disease burden, the working group estimated disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) due to noise-related CHD. DALYs reflect how much the expectancy of healthy life is reduced by premature death or by disability caused by disease. This measure lets policy makers compare disease burdens associated with different environmental factors and forecast the likely impact of preventive policies. The working group estimated that in 2002 Europeans lost 880,000 DALYs to CHD related to road traffic noise.
Chronic high levels of stress hormones such as cortisol, adrenaline, and noradrenaline can lead to hypertension, stroke, heart failure, and immune problems. According to a review of the research in the January–March 2004 issue of Noise and Health, arousal associated with nighttime noise exposure increased blood and saliva concentrations of these hormones even during sleep. “Taken together, recent epidemiologic data show us that noise is a major stressor that can influence health through the endocrine, immune, and cardiovascular systems,” says Prasher.
Other recent support for an association of cardiovascular mortality with noise comes from a study published in the 1 January 2007 issue of Science of the Total Environment. The results showed an 80% increased risk of cardiovascular mortality for women who judged themselves to be sensitive to noise. “Given these findings, noise sensitivity is a serious candidate to be a novel risk factor for cardiovascular mortality in women,” says Marja Heinonen-Guzejev, a research scientist at the University of Helsinki and lead author of the paper.
There is also a potential interaction between noise and air pollution, given that individuals exposed to traffic noise, for example, are often simultaneously exposed to air pollution. Prasher is currently investigating the effects of noise alone and in combination with chemical pollution.
The broader implications of chronic noise exposure also need to be considered. “Noise pollution contributes not only to cardiovascular disease, but also to hearing loss, sleep disruption, social handicaps, diminished productivity, impaired teaching and learning, absenteeism, increased drug use, and accidents,” says physician Louis Hagler, who coauthored a review on noise pollution in the March 2007 Southern Medical Journal. “The public health repercussions of increasing noise pollution for future generations could be immense.”
Written by M. Nathaniel Mead Environ Health Perspect. 2007 November; 115(11): A536–A537.
Copyright This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose.
Noise Pollution: The Sound Behind Heart Effects
M. Nathaniel Mead
1/17/08 WIND FARM NOISE IS A BIG PROBLEM FOR RESIDENTS, BUT WIND FARM OWNERS STILL AREN'T SURE THERE IS A PROBLEM AT ALL
January 17, 2008 The Tribune-Democrat
The Portage Township supervisors are jumping into the fray over what some residents say is excessive noise from turbines at the Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm.
Supervisors will hire a private sound engineer to determine the amount of noise made by the spinning turbines.
The move comes at the urging of residents who say the windmills sometimes operate at sound levels exceeding ordinance limits.
Two months ago, officials in Juniata Township, Blair County, ordered an independent sound study.
"We're agreeing to work with them on this," Supervisor Elwood Selapack said of a plan to hire Paul Heishman, a sound engineer from Mechanicsburg, to conduct noise studies.
A dollar limit on the study was not set by Portage Township officials, but the cost is not expected to exceed a few thousand dollars, based on a proposed fee for the Juniata work.
Built by Gamesa Energy USA and sold last year to Babcock & Brown, the wind farm is at the Cambria-Blair county line, and the turbines affect residents in both counties.
Heishman is expected to do the studies after Feb. 1, when steps being taken by Gamesa to eliminate the noise problems are completed, officials said Wednesday.
Local residents Bruce Brunett of Portage Township and Jill Stull of Juniata Township are convinced the noise - which they compare to the roar of a jet - is not the rotors, but a design flaw.
The townships have ordinances setting allowable noise limits from the turbines at 45 decibels, a level Heishman said is similar to bird calls on a summer day.
Juniata Supervisor Dave Kane said he heard the noise from the turbines and is concerned.
"They definitely have a problem. The windmills were making noise last week. They sounded like jet motors," Kane said.
Babcock & Brown spokesman Matt Dallas said the company is hopeful that work to repair the turbine rotors will quiet the machines.
The company still is not convinced noise levels exceed maximum allowable levels.
Recent testing by a sound engineer showed the levels within the ordinance levels, Dallas said, adding the testing was done "under every condition."
Of particular concern for Portage Township officials is the yet-to-be-completed second phase of the project, where many of the turbines overlook Martindale, a town of 150 homes about a half-mile from the site.
"The topography and configuration of the Martindale area is exactly what it is in Juniata Township. They're down in the valley, and they're going to get the noise," Brunett said.
Meanwhile, Babcock & Brown said it wants to be a good neighbor.
"We're willing to do what it takes to make sure we are within those (ordinance) guidelines," Dallas said.
Home in Invenergy wind project near the Town of Bryron, Fond du Lac County, WI
In February, Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy hosted an informational meeting at VanAbles in Hollandtown, WI. The event drew over 600 people. One of the speakers was Monroe County farmer, Doug Fries, who spoke about why he changed his mind about hosting Invenergy's wind turbines on his property.
Here is some of what he said about his encounter with Invenergy wind developers:
"They offered us four thousand dollars a year.... I was the middle guy in Ridgeville. I own 900 acres. And they said to me right before the one meeting, "We know we're offering everyone four thousand, but for you what we'll do is this: how much money will it take?"
I said, "I thought you said everybody gets the same."
"Well, you're the guy right in the middle. We can't make this work without you."
So I said, "I get more, then?"
"Yeah. How much more will it take?"
I said, "You guys need to get on the road. Because we're done talking. Because you're liars."
They lied to us. They went right down to the meeting an hour later and told everybody at that meeting that everybody got the same.
My son, myself, and my hired man was sitting at the table when they said that. They denied saying it at the meeting, just an hour earlier what they said.
I don't want to deal with guys like that. I want to deal with guys that are on the up and up.
Watch all of what Doug Fries had to say by clicking on the links below: Part One
Baker Tilly Capital successfully provided advisory services to wind developers to sell a 20-megawatt wind farm facility.
CH Shirley Wind, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Central Hudson Enterprises Corporation (CHEC), plans to invest $50 million in a 20-megawatt wind farm located in Glenmore, Wisconsin.
CH Shirley Wind acquired a 90-percent controlling interest in the project, which carries a 20-year power purchase agreement contract with Wisconsin Public Service Corporation for the electric output of its eight wind turbines. Construction on Shirley Wind will begin in 2010 and is expected to be completed in the fourth quarter of 2010.
"Baker Tilly Capital was able to deliver the required funding partner, support negotiations of our development agreements, and effectively meet project timelines while in a tremendously challenging capital market."
- Bill Rakocy, Managing Member Emerging Energies of Wisconsin, LLC
Click on the image below to watch a video interview with Barbara Ashbee, one of the wind project residents in Ontario forced out of her home by wind turbine noise.
To: All Liberal and NDP MPP's in Ontario. Minister Gerretsen, Minister Duguid, Premier McGuinty and Minister Matthews
On Wednesday April 28, 2010 by your words and actions, you very forcefully told me via the media and formally at Queens Park in the Legislature, that my husband and I are not credible.
You told many Ontario families that they are not credible.
You told Dr. Robert McMurtry and Carmen Krogh that they are not credible even with their exceptional credentials and unparalleled professional experience.
Not one of you has ever called me or interviewed me.
Your incompetence, your neglect and your apathy forced my husband and I from our home. You are fully to blame and I resent that you continue to do this to additional families in Ontario with all of the information you have at hand.
Instead of correcting the problems your choice is to continue to publicly and callously demoralize and cause harm to people.
While you were spouting your negligent commentaries about the extensive research done in Europe, and your brazen and completely inaccurate statements that they have no problems associated with wind turbines, in the gallery not only was Norma Schmidt who had the astonishing courage to stand and speak up because she couldn't take listening to any more, but there was a lot more going on.
For those of you who spoke by voting against the moratorium and those who spoke on behalf of your parties that day I want you to imagine being forced to leave your home.
Imagine that you, your spouse and your children are sick and can no longer sleep and thrive in your own home. Imagine all of the arrangements you have to make. Where do you go? Where do the kids go?
Who'll take the cat and 2 dogs? Will you have to separate them, board them?
How will you pay your mortgage and utilities and still afford another place to rent? Do you have to get a line of credit? Who will even consider giving you one if you're admitting you can't live in your home. It will be now worthless and of no value to the bank.
What do you take with you? Everything?...or just the bare minimum to live on? What about the stuff you have to leave? Will it be safe or will the house be broken into now that it's been abandoned. How can you just leave everything?
What do you say to the kids teachers when they've been uprooted, are having difficulty in school and you can't trust that they will understand because nobody believes it. Will they suspect that you and your spouse are splitting up for other reasons?
How do you protect your children from being ridiculed by other families in the community? How can you do all this and do your job, when you are so deprived of sleep you cannot even form a coherent sentence. Is there a government assistance program that can help you find temporary accomodations, who can help financially and emotionally? Why isn't somebody listening and why isn't your government helpingyou?
On April 28th, 2010 I know that there were at least 15 people present who have already gone through, or are going through these questions right now. These brave people were able to attend this important day by leaving their jobs and travelling for hours by car, bus and GO Transit.
I don't know how many more of them were actually present because I certainly don't know them all, but their presence represented all of the victims in the province and you stood up in front of them and revictimized them over and over again with your inept and unresearched comments. You told the world that all of these people have no credibilty.
Present that day was a teenager, who became so sick that her parents had to send her to live with relatives until they too could find alternate accomodations. They had to find homes for most of their animals, but still return to their abandoned farm daily to care of some they can't get moved yet.
They also have full time jobs. These people were there, listening to you from the gallery. So too was a neighbour of theirs who is too sick to stay in their home and has to sleep elsewhere at night. And a senior citizen who has to stay in a rental house.
There were multiple families who built brand new homes, their dream homes and now they cannot finish them. They have lost the desire and energy to finish their plans. They cannot continue to live there. They are sick. They too were in the gallery.
The dreams and the daily lives of these families are being crushed, and yet these people still made it to this important event at Queens Park on April 28th, 2010. Many in attendance have been forced from their homes and I personally know other families, unable to make it, that have also had to abandon their homes. Who knows for sure how many more are suffering in silence. So tell me, what is the magic number you are all waiting for? How many people?
What a shameful comment that after listening to the passionate plea for acknowledgment and help that came from your gallery, you actually returned to finish your dicrediting and dismissal of adverse health effects and voted against the moratorium. Unbelievable.
At some point the media will get wise to your sly "extensive research" and "best sciences" statements and will start doing their own research and interviews instead of relying on you for comment.
Good luck with that. Barbara Ashbee RR1 Orangeville, Ontario L9W 2Y8
The BPRC Research Nerd
