Entries in Wisconsin wind farm (69)

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

Note from the BPWI Research Nerd:

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

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

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

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

Does Tiredness Make You Fat?

Source: London Times

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

FINDINGS

SOURCE: European Journal of Endocrinology

Sleep and the epidemic of obesity in children and adults

Eve Van Cauter and Kristen L Knutson

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

FROM The Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics

Childhood Sleep Time and Long-Term Risk for Obesity:

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

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

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

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

 

SECOND FEATURE:

A LETTER FROM A SCHOOL TEACHER IN TURBINE TOWN

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

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

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

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

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

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

Welcome to “Turbine Town” Clear Creek, Ontario.

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

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

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

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

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

I have:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I feel like a gypsy.

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

TRACY WHITWORTH, School Teacher

Clear Creek, Ontario

CLICK HERE FOR SOURCE

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

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

Home in an Illinois wind farm 

Wind turbine sound needs research

Source: NHS Choices Knowledge Service

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

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

Thursday January 28 2010

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

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

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

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

More research is needed on wind turbines and health

Source: NHS Choices Knowledge Service

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

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

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

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

 

Where did the story come from?

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

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

What kind of research was this?

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

What did the research involve?

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

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

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

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

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

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

What were the basic results?

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

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

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

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The panel reached agreement on three key points:

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

Links to the headlines

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

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

Links to the science

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

 SECOND STORY:

WIND TURBINES DISRUPT LOCAL RESIDENTS

Northern Star, www.northernstar.info

By Demarcus Robinson

January 29, 2010

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Take care of the noise,” Kyler said.

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

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

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

THIRD STORY:

Wind farms: Financial Windfall or destruction of rural land?

Source: mywebtimes.com

January 29, 2010

 By Derek Barichello

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

What happened?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why does it matter?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What’s next?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Want to do more?

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

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

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

Wind Industry Background Check:

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

SOURCE: University of Iowa, Center for Agricultural Taxation

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

Click here to download entire document.

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

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

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

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

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

SECOND FEATURE:

More from the University of Iowa report: Property Values

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

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

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

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

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

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

University of Iowa, Center for Agricultural Taxation

Click here to download entire document.

THIRD FEATURE: 

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

More from the University of Iowa report: Contractual Issues

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

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

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

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

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

1/18/09 DOUBLE FEATURE: How will you know if a wind farm is going to be built around your home? Will it be before the trucks start hauling the turbine blades past your house? AND In Brown County Wisconsin, the Dr. is IN 

Near Town of Byron, Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin. Turbine construction phase of Invenergy Forward Energy Wind Farm. Photo by Gerry Meyer

How will you know if wind developers have targeted your community? If you're lucky there may be something about it in the local paper, or something may be listed on the published agenda for the Town board meeting.

In the past, developers were very open with the community about their plans. They changed that once people began to oppose projects. Now they are more likely to keep news of wind farms a secret from the community until key landowners are signed up.

Wisconsin's recently passed turbine siting reform legislation requires that only neighbors directly adjacent to a hosting landowners property be notified that wind turbines are about to go in near their homes.

This notification does not have to happen until the wind developer submits a formal application for the project to the Town board and/or the Public Service Commission.

A developer won't file an application until enough landowners are signed up, so by the time you find out about it, the project may well be on its way. That's what happened to one of our neighbors to the north who tells us his story here

Commentaries: Study of wind project may blow you away

By: Erin Logan, Zumbrota,

SOURCE: The Republican Eagle

January 17, 2010

I found out by pure accident my home is in the Goodhue Wind Project area by looking at the map published Dec. 9 Zumbro Shopper. What a surprise. Why wasn’t I notified?

I received a packet in the mail sometime around Dec. 15 from a Twin Cities attorney; let’s just call it “notification.” I decided I better read the information to find out what it means to be in the Goodhue Wind Project.

The 212-page document is a dry read, but some interesting information caught my attention. It includes a site map identifying homes and proposed placement of the 400-foot tall wind turbines.

To my surprise my home does not exist on the proposed project map, but it does show a wind turbine 100 feet from my home and two more within 1,500 feet. I wonder how many other homes have been omitted from or wiped off the map?

Let me share a few things I have learned since I read through this packet.

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission has jurisdiction over this project due its size. The public can submit comments regarding the permit application until Jan. 22. I will definitely take advantage of this opportunity, although I’m not sure how much good it will do.

I understand the PUC was made aware of homes not included in the project application, but were not concerned with the detail of the site plan.

Reading through information on the PUC Web site I learned a state statute allows our county commissioners to adopt more stringent zoning ordinances for Large Wind Energy Conversion Systems. This means our local elected officials have the authority to define what is best for Goodhue County residents regarding this project.

The purpose of the setback is to protect adjacent landowners if the turbine falls over, mitigate noise levels and shadow flicker that may be imposed on their homes. It will also provide protection if any ice builds up on the blades, breaks off and plummets 400 feet to the ground.

I have learned that current Goodhue County zoning setback requirements do not allow a wind turbine to be erected within 750 feet of a dwelling. This is reciprocal in that a dwelling cannot be constructed within 750 feet of a wind turbine.

Hmmm, I think I just lost the right to build an attached garage or an addition between my house and that wind turbine 750 feet away.

The property line setbacks are less stringent: 500 feet for a 400-foot tall wind turbine.

I encourage anyone who has an unoccupied residence or temporary dwelling in place to speak up. This project could restrict where you are allowed to build on your property.

Gaps in the system like this make it clear to me we are not prepared to endorse a project of this magnitude. This is new territory that warrants some education in lieu of assuming we can rely on outdated regulations to provide safety, health and well-being to Goodhue County residents.

As I read through this permit application I see inaccurate data, incomplete information and open-ended statements. There are far too many to include in detail, so I’ll share a few of the items that seem fairly important to me.

• Actual wind turbine size — The permit application states that this can be changed to meet the needs of the project. Will they be 300 feet, 400 feet or taller?

• Equipment specifications — The application identifies the sound level created by the smallest wind turbine they would choose to install. This data is used to determine the distance the wind turbine can be located from your residence while ensuring they don’t exceed the maximum amount of noise pollution you can be subjected to.

• Project decommissioning — As stated in the application, all above-ground equipment and foundations, to a depth of 4 feet, will be removed. This does not meet Goodhue County Ordinance, Article 18, Section 5, Subd. 10.

• Economic impact — This is such a multi-faceted topic, but it is good to note the claim that the local economy will benefit from the dollars the project will pay in state and local taxes and the long-term beneficial impacts to the counties’ tax base. Take a look at the corporate Web site — http://www.nationalwind.com/minnesota_wind_facts — which lists the financial incentives for wind projects. The way I read that information, this project will be exempt from both property and sales tax.

I would also like to know what kind of long-term impacts this will have on local and county roadway lifecycles.

I hope enough people encourage our commissioners to update zoning ordinances to adequately mitigate the impact of a Large Wind Energy Conversion System on Goodhue County residents.

For anyone who thinks this doesn’t affect them, keep in mind wind conditions are similar throughout Goodhue County and there is a lot of land out there. Implementing this project may open the door for wind turbines in your neighborhood.

I need more information before I can make an educated decision on whether this project will be a benefit or a detriment. Perhaps others in and around the Goodhue Wind Project area have received more information.

This is a community-based project, yet I have never had one of the local representatives stop by during one of the many trips they’ve made past my home. I believe that a good idea is worth talking about, so why all of the secrecy?

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: Law firms are beginning to directly address the issue of wind farm leases and land rights on behalf of landowners. To read a post called "Reasons to be Careful with Wind Leases" on the website of one such law firm in Minnesota,  CLICK HERE.

For more on Wind Power Law, visit

SECOND FEATURE

This comes to us courtesy of another Wisconsin group-- Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy ( BCCRWE.)

If you know anyone in Brown County, you may want to let them know that a big wind farm is coming their way. To link them to the BCCRWE website CLICK HERE

The following letter was written and read by Dr. Herb Coussons before the Morrison town board a their last town board meeting:

January 8, 2010

RE: Proposed Ledge Wind Project

TO: The Town Boards of Wrightstown,  Morrison, Holland and Ledgeview

I am writing to summarize what I believe are real and previously unconsidered effects of building wind turbines among populated residential and farming areas.

The current zoning standards do not take into consideration the growing evidence regarding the adverse health risks of placing wind turbines closer than 1.5 miles from residences.

Multiple studies and case reports are being published that systematically record a group of symptoms that seems to occur in about 10% of individuals who live within 1.5 miles of wind turbines.

These symptoms included but are not limited to: sleep disturbances, chronic headaches, migraines, ringing in the ears, visceral vibratory vestibular disturbance, decreased abilities in memory and concentration, fatigue, irritability and upper respiratory ailments.

Many of these symptoms were not present prior to individuals living in the vicinity of the wind turbines and resolved when the affected people were able to move away from the turbines. Most of the case reports show that the individuals have no emotional disturbances that would lead to anxiety and fear as a cause of their new symptoms. Children seem to be affected by the same symptoms only they are manifest in different ways such as nightmares and bedwetting or decreased school performance and behavior problems.

There are now many published reports in the US, Canada, England, Europe, and New Zealand that refer to this consistent cluster of symptoms as “Wind Turbine Syndrome.” There are also governmental agencies and health organizations that have spoken out on the topic, including: Health Canada, the NIH, the French National Academy of Medicine, The Maine Medical Association, the Minnesota Department of Public Health, the Government of the State of Victoria Australia, the Japanese Minister of Environment, and the US National Research Council.

The symptoms experienced by humans may also be seen more seriously and widespread in animals leading to adverse consequences. Wild animals that have highly developed senses of hearing and vibration (bats, snakes, deer, turkey, and birds) virtually disappear from large wind developments. Domestic farm animals such as chickens, goats, and cattle are all reported to display adverse behaviors, as well as reproduction abnormalities and even death. There are many case reports of decreased dairy production and egg production in farm animals that are reversed when the animals are moved away from wind turbines.

Animal studies and human data are mounting that the adverse symptoms are related to several direct effects of the wind turbines. 1) Audible noise, 2) Low frequency noise, 3) Shadow flicker, and 4) Mixed sensory input (confusing and unrelenting sensations that conflict in the brain).

The audible noise above 30-35dB (A-weighted measurements) is enough to disturb sleep. Chronic sleep disturbance can lead to fatigue, decreased memory and concentration, chronic headaches, weight gain, hypertension and cardiovascular deterioration. 30dB is the limit recommended by the World Health Organization as the maximum noise level at nighttime outside of a home. Most of the local ordinances allow up to 50dB up to 10% of the time, and exclude measurements if the wind is blowing greater than 30mph.

The Low frequency noise (C-weighted measurements) is not always audible yet the body feels the vibration and it stimulates the hearing and balance parts of the inner ear. This type of noise may also resonate in body cavities leading to chest pressure and a sense of motion. The results are nausea, vomiting and motion sickness. In fact such low frequency noise is so unpleasant, it has been used in the Middle East as a weapon for crowd control. The recommended maximum intensity of C-weighted measurements is 20dB outside of a home. Most of the local ordinances do not mention C-weighted measurements despite the fact that most wind turbine noise is low frequency.

Shadow-flicker triggers a reflexive response in animals that results in a flight or flight response leading to an increased heart rate, muscle tension and a sense of movement. Shadow-flicker and noise can be reduced by increasing the distance from the wind turbine.

These sensory inputs, audible noise, low frequency vibration/inaudible noise, and shadow flicker present conflicting sensations to the brain resulting in worsening symptoms of migraines, anxiety, nausea, vomiting.

There are other practical risks as well. According to the Caithness Windfarm Information Forum, from 1999 through June 2008 there were over 500 accidents around the world, including North America, involving ice throws, blade disintegration, fire and tower failure from large wind turbines. If improperly sited, wind energy systems produce electro-magnetic radiation that can interfere with broadcast communications and signals. They even create signals on Doppler weather radar simulating severe weather thereby making any weather warnings in our area limited. There are dangers and restrictions in flight activity due to potential collisions with aircraft. This limitation has resulted in rescue helicopters not landing in wind farms.

Much of this information has been understood as wind turbine developments grow across Europe, Canada, Australia and the US.

As I have read the studies and case reports from across the US and the world, as well as listening to residents of the development around Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, I have become convinced that the health and safety of those living closer than 2500 feet to wind turbines will be adversely effected. Some living within 1.5 miles may show severe signs of wind turbine syndrome.

These facts were not well known or considered prior to 2007 when many of the ordinances were written. Now due to greater knowledge and more experience, we must consider the more recent conservative site requirements for example in the Town of Union in Rock County Wisconsin. http://www.tn.union.wi.gov/Docs_by_cat_type.asp?doccatid=200&locid=123 <http://www.tn.union.wi.gov/Docs_by_cat_type.asp?doccatid=200&amp;locid=123>

I would recommend anyone to review their ordinance, which has extensive documentation on the rationale behind their more restrictive requirements when compared to the state of Wisconsin. Their diligence in research and enacting an ordinance based on the current evidence should be respected and imitated.

If the current setbacks of 1000 feet and maximum audible noise measurements of 50dB are utilized, then I believe that up to 80% of people exposed to these levels of audible noise, low frequency noise and shadow flicker will feel some adverse health symptoms. Because of these conclusions, I would hope that our local town boards will consider a moratorium on wind development until they can consider the evidence that shows the health and safety risks of wind developments such as the Ledge Wind Farm and provide the leadership by enacting ordinances that reflect the current understanding of these health and safety risks imposed by wind turbines sited close to residences and businesses in our communities.

Respectfully,

Herb Coussons, MD

6649 Ledgetop Dr

Greenleaf, WI

920-639-8434

1/17/09 State to wind farm residents: We'll give you this big nickel if you sacrifice that little dime-


Click on the image above to hear what turbines can sound like on a bad day. This video was shot by a resident of the Invenrgy Forward Energy project near the Town of Byron in Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin. The closest turbine to his house is less than 1600 feet away.

Are setbacks and noise limits a public health issue or a profitability issue ?

Profitability for a wind project relies on the same short setbacks and inadequate noise limits that cause problems for residents forced to live with them.

Initially, Wisconsin families complaining of harm due to short setbacks and inadequate noise limits were not believed and even openly ridiculed, particularly by wind developers and lobbyists.

In granting recent approval for the Glacier Hills wind project, the Public Service Commission admitted the problems do exist, and some residents will be bothered by turbine noise and shadow flicker. The commission even suggested the utility consider a buyout of the most severely affected homes.

Now that the PSC has acknowledged the problem, the attitude toward wind farm resident's complaints and concerns has changed. The harm caused to families by inadequate setbacks is now considered unfortunate but acceptable collateral damage, a minor concern when weighed against the greater good.

But what is the greater good in the case of Glacier Hills? Most of us assume it's the reduction of green house gas emissions by using wind power.

However, Clean Wisconsin let the PSC know that there would be no reduction in CO2/GHG levels unless the utility is required to shut down an existing coal burning plant, something the utility has no plans of doing.

In a post hearing brief submitted to the PSC, Clean Wisconsin states:

"If the Commission allows WEPCO to continue construct Glacier Hills and operate all of its existing coal-fired capacity, WEPCO’s rate-payers will be paying over $525 million for a new facility that is not needed to satisfy demand and will not result in overall CO2 emission reductions."

Which begs the question: If there is to be no reduction in CO2 emissions, what is the state getting in exchange for forcing Wisconsin families to sacrifice their health, well being, and property value?

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: It's not just Wisconsin residents who are being forced to make questionable sacrifices. Click on the image below to hear about sacrifices our neighbors to the north are forced to make. An Ontairo dairy farmer speaks about wind leases, turbine related negative health effects and electrical pollution