Better Plan, Wisconsin

More complications as local residents react to excessive and unexpected noise.

 Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

Andy Stone, January 29, 2010

In Vinalhaven, a small island community off the coast of central Maine, the recent installation of three massive wind towers was hailed by residents and developers as the answer to the island’s energy woes, but as soon as the turbines started turning this past November, some local residents began to regret what they now feel was a “devil’s bargain.”

In the first days of operation, many of the surrounding property owners – there are 15 within a half mile of the towers – were shocked to find that the sound of the giant propellers’ turning was far more audible and intrusive than developers led them to believe it would be.

They reported hearing a noise described variably as “whooshing,” “roaring,” “thumping” and “grinding” at all hours, even from inside their homes with the windows closed. Some compared it to living in the vicinity of a highway or airport, and one resident described how the sound intensifies as wind speed rises, building to “an in-your-face noise, like jet engines roaring combined with a grinding and pulsating sound that echoes in your head, keeps you awake at night, and beats on your house like a drum.”

The reality of the noise levels, say the islanders, is in stark contrast with what proponents told them about the project – namely that the sound of the propellers would be largely masked by ambient background noise, and that at times when the propellers were louder, ambient noise would be correspondingly louder as well.

To its credit, the Fox Island Electric Cooperative, which owns and operates the towers, has been responsive to residents’ complaints, but no quick or easy solution has presented itself. The Cooperative is currently making physical modifications to the turbines, but the changes are likely to have only a marginal impact.

Simply slowing the turbines down is also an imperfect solution since it would mean reduced power production and lower economic benefits to island residents.

In the bigger picture, the situation is another in a series of complications and challenges for advocates of wind power development in Maine.

The industry has grown rapidly in the state; in the past four years alone, developers have completed or are currently building projects worth over $500 million, with a collective production capacity of over 200 megawatts.

These installations range from single small towers erected by municipalities to massive industrial sites like the 40-turbine, 60-megawatt Rollins Mountain Wind Farm. In addition, Maine has received an $8 million grant from the U.S. Dept. of Energy to create three ocean-based wind energy research stations, and Governor John Baldacci has made wind and other renewable power a central focus of his administration’s energy policy.

In the midst of this rapid proliferation, more and more cautionary tales like that of Vinalhaven continue to emerge.

A similar situation arose recently in the town of Mars Hill, where a group of residents filed a civil suit against the operators of a local wind power facility, claiming they were sorely misled when promised that noise “would not be an issue.”

Since the large 28-turbine facility began operating, those residents have suffered physical symptoms including headaches and “frayed nerves” from the constant and inescapable noise, and have complained of a decrease in overall quality of life and an unforeseen reduction in property values.

Other towns in Maine have taken notice of the difficulties in places like Vinalhaven and Mars Hill and have begun to preemptively draft noise ordinances and other guidelines geared specifically toward potential local wind power installations.

Part of the underlying problem is that state noise laws are outdated and designed for traditional industrial noise, which is typically in the higher frequencies of the spectrum. Wind turbines emit low frequency noise, which is less easily absorbed, causing it to travel farther and to penetrate more easily through walls and other obstacles.

Some Mainers have called for legislative action, asking the State legislature to consider bills reducing maximum noise limits. They point out that lowering the limit by only three decibels – from 45 to 42 – would cut the overall noise volume in half (sound measurement is based on a logarithmic formula).

It remains to be seen what action the legislature will take, and what solutions will be found for places like Vinalhaven and Mars Hill, where residents feel betrayed and fear the permanent loss of their once-quiet and peaceful existence.

It is clear that, as tales of such situations circulate, wind power advocates and developers are faced with an ever-tougher challenge in winning over public opinion and bringing local populations on board for prospective future projects.

Wind power is an undeniably important technology that has already proven its value as a clean, sustainable and profitable energy source, but it must continue to be developed in wise and thoughtful ways.

In the midst of the current rapid expansion and growth of the industry, individuals, groups and communities involved in all levels of the effort should remain cognizant of the risks and challenges that arise when, as in Vinalhaven, the promise of wind power technology collides head-on with the reality of its implementation.

Sources:

Monique Aniel and Steve Thurston, Noise Regulations Needed as Wind Power Industry Expands, KENNEBEC JOURNAL, Jan. 17, 2010, available at http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/view/columns/7337109.html

Christopher Cousins, Three Offshore Wind Power Test Sites Unveiled for Maine, BANGOR DAILY NEWS, Dec. 16, 2009, available at http://www.maineville.com/detail/132851.html

Dora Anne Mills, Wind Turbines Neuro-Acoustical Issues, Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention, June 2009, http://www.maine.gov/dhhs/boh/wind-turbines-neuro-acoustical.shtml

Julia Bayly, Residents Air Concerns at Wind Power Hearing, BANGOR DAILY NEWS, Jan. 21, 2010, available at http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/135230.html

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: 

The Nocebo Effect

There has been a marked uptick in the wind industry's use of the term 'the nocebo effect' to explain the complaints about wind turbine noise from those who live near them.

The nocebo effect is the opposite of the placebo effect. A nocebo response occurs when the expectation of a negative effect leads to an actual negative outcome.

In other words, if you expect problems from wind turbines built within half mile of your home, you will have them. If you expect them to keep you awake, it's this expectation -not the actual wind turbine noise-  that is causing the problem.

The Placebo Effect

In the case of the residents of the island of Vinalhaven, there were no negative expectations of the three GE 1.5mw turbines that went on line just a few months ago in September of 2009. The residents closest to the towers were among the strongest supporters and publicly expressed excitement and joy about the project and attended a gathering to celebrate the day they became operational [as reported in this story]

They hardly fit the criteria for the 'nocebo effect'  If anything, the Vinalhaven story illustrates how even the placebo effect isn't strong enough to counter the very real impact of industrial turbine noise, particularly at night.

The 50dbA noise limit proposed for Wisconsin's newly approved Glacier Hills project and for the proposed Ledge Wind project is too high. It has no scientific or medical data to support it as being a safe noise limit for a rural community, especially at night. The public service commission has acknowledged that people will have to make sacrifices, but one wonders how much the commissioners really understand the problem and the extent of the sacrifices they are asking Wisconsin families to bear.

Click on the image below to hear the noise that has driven people out of their Wisconsin homes. The setbacks that make projects profitable for wind developers can bring misery to families who can no longer sleep through the night because of turbine noise

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"

Nerd looks like a ladyVisitors to this website may wonder just who is the 'BPWI Research Nerd'.

You can see the Nerd in this video created by Wisconsin Public Television to help Wisconsin high school students understand how our state government works.

Click here to watch it

Starring: Senator Plale, Representative Soletski, PSC Chairman Eric Callisto, RENEW Wisconsin's Michael Vickerman, wind farm residents Ann and Jason Wirtz, Bruce Dalka and the BPWI Research Nerd

Town of Holland votes for wind-farm moratorium.

Opponents of Invenergy project hope others follow.

Green Bay Press-Gazette, www.greenbaypressgazette.com

February 3, 2010

By Scott Williams,

Opponents of a proposed wind farm in southern Brown County hope the town of Holland is just the first municipality to set a one-year ban on wind farm construction.

Chicago-based Invenergy LLC submitted an application to state regulators in October for permission to develop the Ledge Wind Energy Project within four neighboring towns in southern Brown County. The plan calls for 54 wind turbines in Morrison, 22 in Holland, 20 in Wrightstown and four in Glenmore.

The Holland Town Board voted 3-0 Monday night to impose a one-year moratorium and increase from 1,000 feet to 2,640 feet — equal to a half-mile — how far any wind turbines must be set back from neighboring properties.

Despite the vote, it’s unclear whether local moratoriums or other potential obstacles will have any effect.

The state Public Service Commission has authority to approve such developments regardless of what local officials want, PSC spokesman Tim Le Monds said.

“It trumps anything at the local level,” he said.

The state has not acted on the application yet and is expected to hold public hearings later this year.

But a leading organizer of the opposition in Brown County said Tuesday he believes moratoriums at least will slow the project, so that residents can study and debate the proposal.

“It does send a message,” said Jon Morehouse, spokesman for Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy.

The Invenergy development would be Brown County’s first major commercial wind farm. With the capacity to generate enough electricity to power about 40,000 homes, it also would be larger than any wind farm operating in Wisconsin.

Supporters say the project would bring economic development and clean energy to the area, while opponents fear the intrusion and potential health hazards of the 400-foot-tall spinning turbines.

Invenergy spokesman Kevin Parzyck said the company is following a state regulatory approval process that allows local residents ample opportunity to voice their feelings about the project.

Noting that company officials had not yet seen the Holland Town Board’s latest action, Parzyck said company officials believe their proposal has strong support locally. But he also said the company does not dismiss signs of opposition from local elected leaders.

“We are very sensitive to community needs and desires,” he said.

Holland Chairman Jerry Wall said he believes that at least 50 percent of the town’s residents oppose the Invenergy project. The board action was intended to reflect that, he said.

Wall acknowledged, however, that state regulators might not abide by the town’s wishes.

“They can walk right over you,” he said. “There’s nothing we can do about it.”

Opponents are pushing for similar moratoriums in Morrison, Wrightstown and Glenmore, too. None of those town boards have scheduled votes on the issueyet.

Glenmore Chairman Don Kittell, who has voiced support for the Invenergy project, said he questioned whether a moratorium would have any effect on state regulators. He also said it likely would prompt Invenergy to file a lawsuit that would cost the town money to defend its actions in court.

“Why go through all the hassle?” he said. “It isn’t going to work — not unless you’ve got any money.”

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