7/6/09 What can be done about false storm signals coming from the Butler Ridge wind farm?
Wind Turbines might be asked to stop in severe weather
By Scott Williams
5 July 2009
A Dodge County wind farm might be asked to shut down its rotating turbines during severe weather to avoid disrupting a nearby weather radar system.
National Weather Service officials said they have started discussing such options with owners of the Butler Ridge Wind Farm.
The wind farm’s giant turbines have sent false storm signals to the government radar system in nearby Sullivan, which provides severe weather alerts throughout southeastern Wisconsin.
Tim Crum, a spokesman at the National Radar Operations Center in Norman, Okla., said the wind farm does not present a significant problem for the radar operation about 30 miles away.
However, an agreement to shut down the turbines during inclement weather remains a possibility, Crum said.
“That would be a positive step, if it becomes necessary,” he said.
Butler Ridge, which began operation about six months ago, has 36 turbines that are each about 260 feet tall and 300 feet wide. The operation generates electricity for several surrounding communities.
The National Weather Service in April said the wind farm’s false storm signals could create confusion during real severe weather conditions.
The owner of the wind farm, Babcock & Brown Ltd., later approached weather service officials to discuss the situation and consider possible solutions.
Matt Dallas, a spokesman for Babcock & Brown, said discussions have started, and the two sides are exchanging information about Butler Ridge.
Dallas said it was too soon to speculate whether any changes at Butler Ridge would result.
“We’re just trying to figure out what the options are,” he said.
NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: The turbine height of 260 feet given in this article is the hub height of the tower, but not the total height of the turbine. The total height of turbines in the Butler Ridge Project is 400 feet, or about as tall as a 40 story building.
The BPRC Research Nerd
7/2/09 If a wind turbine blade explodes in a German forest and no one in the USA hears about it, does it make a sound?
July 2, 2009: Wind Turbine throws blades, cuts path through forest
A fierce storm on the afternoon of July 2, 2009 destroyed portions of an industrial wind turbine located between Brieske and Schwarzheide in Germany.
Pieces, as shown in this photo, flew 150 meters (about 500 feet) through the air landing about 50 meters (about 170 feet) from federal highway Nr. 169.
No one was injured.
The approximately 40 meter (about 100 feet) blade broke several trees as it cut a track through the forest. The blade showed signs of lightning damage.
Extra Credit Question:
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN LIGHTING HITS A TURBINE BLADE?
When Lightning Strikes Wind Turbines
[Click here to read at source]
By Kate Galbraith
With snow, ice and frigid weather, winter creates complications for renewable energy, as I wrote last week. But for Ralph Brokaw, a Wyoming rancher with both cows and wind turbines on his land, the worst hazard is not the ice that his blades can throw off in the winter.
Rather, it is lightning strikes on the towers, which usually occur in summer when there are more storms.
The effect is spectacular — and scary. “It will explode those blades, and they’ll throw chunks of blade several hundred feet,” Mr. Brokaw, a member of his local fire department, told me over the telephone.
As the chunks fall, the firefighters douse them with water. Otherwise, “There’s really not much you can do with a turbine that’s 200 foot tall and on fire,” he said.
Mr. Brokaw said that in the past five years he has been called to help put out two or three turbine fires. He said that “there’s oil and gearboxes and a tremendous amount of wiring” in the generator — so even though the turbines are very well-grounded, they can sometimes light up.
MORE EXTRA CREDIT READING: [Source]
When Lightning Strikes Wind Turbines II
Back in December, a Wyoming rancher described to me the terrifying fireworks that ensue when a bolt of lightning hits a wind turbine.
“It will explode those blades, and they’ll throw chunks of blade several hundred feet,” said Ralph Brokaw, whose ranch accommodates both turbines and cows.
After I wrote the post, I got an e-mail message from Kim Loehr of the Lightning Protection Institute. She wrote to tell me that the National Fire Protection Association has updated its handbook on installing lightning protection systems to include a new section on wind machines.
Due to the proliferation of wind farms and the increasing heights of the turbines — some of them more than 250 feet tall — there is, she noted, a rising number of lightning-related incidents.
Now that the thunderstorm season is rolling around (central Texans were roiled by lightning shows over the weekend), I thought I would share a few pointers.
According to the handbook, wind turbines are particularly complicated to protect because they have so many different components — including non-conducting composite materials like glass-reinforced plastic. Any lightning protection system must therefore be sufficiently comprehensive to take account for all of the parts.
“While physical blade damage is the most expensive and disruptive damage caused by lightning,” the handbook states, “by far the most common is damage to the control system.”
The massive blades will often have a receptor at the tip, which can channel the lightning into the proper wires and onward to the ground. Two receptors might be necessary for larger blades.
“Protecting wind turbine blades against lightning is not about avoiding strikes, but attracting them,” states LM Glasfiber, a global blade manufacturer, on a section of its Web site devoted to lightning. “This makes it possible to direct the flow of the lightning and ensure that the components exposed to its effects can withstand the forces involved.”
The company says that it meets certification standards requiring blades to be capable of withstanding 98 percent of lightning strikes.
Without the system, though, it’s not pretty: “A lightning strike on an unprotected blade can lead to temperature increases of up to 30,000 degrees Celsius, and result in an explosive expansion of the air within the blade,” LM Glasfiber states.
EVEN MORE EXTRA CREDIT READING:
Case study of lightning damage to wind turbine blade
May, 2008 by Richard Kithil
This brief document provides a case study ofa wind energy facility in Texas and the effect of lightning strikes on wind turbine blades.
Despite the1.5 MW turbine blades having been equipped with lightning protection, the blades failed as a result of lightning strikes.
According to the report:
Lightning protection consists of several exterior copper “receptor” air termination discs, which are fastened to interior aluminum conductors running the length of the blade.
Conductors are fastened to the blade and to one another with steel bolts.
Near the blade root a portion of the conductor is imbedded into the fibreglas.
The conductor transitions from the blade root area via bonding to the hub and thence to a ground reference.
Other components of the lightning protection systems were examined briefly.
The manufacturer provided satisfactory surge protection for sensitive electronics.
Grounding requirements were completed “per manufacturer’s specifications” by the installation contractor.
Conclusion:
The lightning conductor did not conduct as designed.
Lightning created an internal shock wave from air or moisture expansion, or both.
Lightning temperatures may have caused interior moisture to transition to an expansive state (steam).
In turn, over-pressures stressed the blade to subsequent failure.
Further research into wind turbine blade interior air/moisture expansion issues is needed.
The full report can be accessed by clicking on the .pdf link below.
Web link: http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/wind1.html
Download File(s):
wind_blade_damage.pdf (426.6 kB)
Wind turbine blade tip damaged by lighting
6/29/09 No longer considered benign: Minnesota Health Department raises questions about wind turbine impact on human health
Homes inside the Blue Sky/Green Field Wind Farm: Three of 88 turbines. Malone, Wisconsin, Fond du Lac County, June 27th, 2009Minnesota takes it seriously. Will Wisconsin take a closer look?
Science Undecided over turbine's health effects
By Patrick Springer
29 June 2009
29 June 2009
A Minnesota Department of Health analysis of possible health effects from wind turbines concludes that annoyance and diminished quality of life are the most frequent complaints from nearby residents.
The “white paper,” a review of available scientific research, notes that people vary greatly in their sensitivity to noise, with penetrating, low-frequency sounds posing the most problems.
Distance helps dampen annoying or possibly harmful effects, the report concluded.
“Beyond a half mile the likelihood of impacts is fairly low in most terrains,” said Rita Messing, an author of the report and supervisor of the health department’s site assessment program.
Minnesota’s minimum setback requirement for wind turbines is at least 500 feet or a distance that would not allow nighttime noise levels above 50 decibels more than half of any given hour.
North Dakota has used as its “informal” setback requirement a minimum distance of 1,400 feet, about a quarter of a mile. The North Dakota Public Service Commission plans to conduct hearings to evaluate a formal standard.
Clay County is considering a new zoning ordinance with a minimum setback of 1,500 feet or a distance that would not allow nighttime noise levels above 45 decibels.
“It is an issue,” Tim Magnusson, the Clay County planning director, said of noise and health complaints stemming from large wind turbines, including headaches, dizziness and sleep disturbance.
The proposed longer setback, he said, is intended “as an effort to mitigate some of those issues.” The county has jurisdiction to site small wind projects, capable of generating fewer than 5 megawatts.
The review by Minnesota health officials was partly in response to concerns raised by Clay County residents.
Per and Sandra Anderson, who live in Moorhead and own land in rural Clay County near the proposed Lakeswind Wind Power Plant, have asked for a thorough review of possible health effects from wind turbines.
The Minnesota Department of Health review makes clear that the effects of low-frequency vibration are not well understood, and many uncertainties remain, Per Anderson said.
The National Research Council, which has called for further research, concluded that noise produced by wind turbines generally is not a major concern beyond a half mile.
Meanwhile, some foreign experts, including the French Academy of Medicine, have called for a minimum setback of a mile, Per Anderson said.
“To me it’s an indication that there’s concern from the scientific community and industry doesn’t get it,” he added.
Anderson, a religion professor whose specialty is ethics, said officials shouldn’t wait for research to be clear when human health is at stake.
Officials, he said, should take a precautionary approach in regulating wind turbines, which is increasingly the trend in Europe.
“I don’t think that’s morally responsible given the evidence,” Anderson said of waiting to impose longer setbacks for wind turbines. “I’m arguing for better safe than sorry.”
Messing said any health effects from wind turbines are “probably a fairly low-level health issue,” but because effects appear quite variable no one could predict who would be affected.
That must be balanced with economic benefits, including revenues for schools, that local communities must consider, she said. A half mile, she said, “is a rather large distance,” and noted most jurisdictions allow turbines much closer to residents.
On the other hand, she noted that low-frequency noise, often pulsing, can penetrate buildings. “So that’s an issue.”
[Download entire Minnesota Department of Health White Paper: Public Health Impacts of Wind Turbines by CLICKING HERE ]
6/26/09: Sleepless in Michigan makes TV News: What happens when turbines are sited too close to homes?
For those whose internet connection is not fast enough to watch video, a transcript is provided below.
The True Cost of Wind
Huron County, MI
Are Wind Farms Ruining Quality of Life?
News Anchor: They can be good for the environment and good for the economy but those wind turbines also come with a price. Do the benefits outweigh the costs?
The I-Team's Bill Walsch went to Huron County to find out.
Live and local now to tell us what he did find.
Bill?
Bill Walsch: Sam, the fight over wind turbines sometimes pits neighbor against neighbor. The man I spoke with tonight didn't want to be identified. He lives in the shadow of a wind turbine and he says it is ruining the health of his family.
(Image of wind turbines)
Wind Farm Resident: This is our new neighbor. Accept it. Adjust. What ever we have to do. If it's noisy to us outside we play music
Walsch: But it isn't just the noise, according to this father of two, it's the the vibration.
Wind Farm Resident: That rumbling feeling you would get when someone with a loud speaker system in their car drives by. You feel that in your body. That is the sensation we feel from the turbine.
Walsch: And it keeps his whole family awake at night. They've tried sleeping pills, white noise machines doctors visits, anything and everything but when the wind blows there is no peace, very little quiet
Wind Farm Resident: We are not allowed to get to that dream state when those turbines spinning and producing energy.
Huron County Board Member: Yes we know we have complaints.
Walsch: Today the Huron County Board of commissioners held their first subcommittee meeting designed to deal with residents complaints. John Deere Wind Energy owns this wind park. They'll conduct a noise study there starting next month.
Wind Company Representative : It will be a sampling program. And in those samples we will try to include turbines that have been highlighted by residents as being of particular concern.
Walsch: Critics say the original zoning ordinance allows the turbines to be too close to houses. County board board commissioners say they are sympathetic to the several complaints they've gotten. They'll consider changing that zoning ordinance.
Commissioner David Peruski: We want to use what we learned in the Bingham Township and other Townships and apply that to the zoning ordinance to eliminate or mitigate maybe future problems.
Walsch: But changing the zoning ordinance will do little for this man and his family.
Wind Farm Resident: Because if you don't have your health, any amount of money isn't worth what we're going through, and what other people are going through.
Walsch: The man we spoke to tonight says he isn't against wind energy. He says he has friends, relatives, neighbors, who want wind turbines on their property. He just prays that county or john deere can come up for a solution to his family's plight. And he thinks any future wind turbines should be placed at least a mile away from homes.
For the I-Team, I'm Bill Walsch, WNEM TV-5
Anchor: Bill, thank you. There are about fifty turbines in that project in Bingham and Sheridan Townships, and many more are planned. Huron county as been identified as having a high level of wind potential.
Wind Park Complaints Considered
By Kate Hessling
After receiving another letter from residents who say wind turbines near their Ubly-area home are creating noise disturbances, county officials said they still are in the process of developing a way to respond to complaints received following a wind park’s construction.
“We thought it would be, as we were told from the beginning of the turbine project, ‘no louder than a clothes dryer,’” reads a letter David and Marilyn Peplinski sent to Huron County officials May 15. “Now we realize that no one wants to stand right next to a running clothes dryer 24 hours a day. This is the reality of it.”
The Peplinskis’ letter states while the audible noise level coming from the park has slightly improved with the spring thaw, the sound resonance has not.
“Our family’s ability to get good nights’ sleep is dismal, to say the least,” the letter reads. “The feeling we get from the spinning turbines is not only heard, but felt in our bodies as well.”
The letter notes the family has never had sleep issues in the past.
“Now, on many evenings, it takes an effort for several of our family members to fall asleep. Then, our sleep is being disturbed many times throughout the night,” the letter states.
Marilyn and David Peplinski’s letter describes the feeling their bodies experience from low frequency sound waves created by nearby turbines as “like when a heavy truck travels by your home, and you can feel the rumble, except that this is a constant rumbling feeling.”
“If you have ever felt a cement truck while the drum is mixing, or the sound energy given off of a large drum when tapped, this is the best way we can describe the feeling we are experiencing,” the May 15 letter states.
The Peplinskis’ letter includes seven questions the couple felt need to be addressed by Huron County officials and John Deere Wind Energy. The questions, which are listed in the breakout box included with this article, include whether Michigan Wind 1 is in compliance with the county ordinance’s noise level maximum and what kind of monitoring method is being used to ensure the noise level is not exceeded.
Huron County Commissioner Dave Peruski, who represents the Ubly area, said he is planning to attend this evening’s Huron County Planning Commission meeting to see what can be done to answer the questions posed in the Peplinskis’ letter and avoid the same problems cropping up in the future as new developments are built in the area.
He said he would like to see a group come together that’s comprised of representatives from the county board of commissioners, planning commission, building and zoning office and John Deere Wind Energy, to develop a complaint resolution procedure.
“That’s the approach I think we need to take,” Peruski said.
Commissioner: ‘We have to take them seriously’
Peruski said he’s met with the Peplinskis and believes their complaints are not without merit.
“We have to take them seriously,” he said, noting there are varying degrees of the problems the Peplinskis are facing that others in the county could face in the future as future wind developments are created. It’s important, Peruski said, to ensure the county’s zoning ordinance is crafted in such a way to avoid these problems from being repeated elsewhere.
David Peplinski said it is his goal these issues are considered in the siting and development of future farms in Huron County, because he wouldn’t wish the problems he and his family have experienced on anyone else.
He stressed he strongly supports alternative renewable energy projects, but feels the effects these projects will have on adjoining property owners need to be taken into consideration in the siting and zoning process.
Also, David Peplinski said, he is not a complainer and his family never wanted to be in the spotlight. Per procedure, his letter became public as soon as it was sent to the Huron County Board of Commissioners.
David Peplinski noted it wasn’t easy for him or his wife to submit the letter, particularly because they don’t want to hurt others in the community, because those living in the area are the family’s neighbors and friends.
As a result, he said he would also like to see there be a complaint mechanism created where when someone is having an issue, it can be handled in a manner other than submitting a letter to the board that will become public.
Regarding the response David Peplinski said he’s received, he noted both the county and John Deere Wind Energy have been very polite and quick in responding to his concerns.
Noise complaints made in March
Huron County commissioners received two letters in March from residents who said wind turbines near their Ubly area homes are creating noise disturbances.
Shortly after the letters were received, commissioners discussed how to address complaints received from residents after a wind development has been constructed and begins producing power.
The letters, which were submitted by Ubly residents Randy and Angela Weber and Dennis and Darcy Mausolf, reported problems of extreme noise increases and outside noise that resembles a distant jet with an intermittent whoosh sound.
“Inside our house, we have a low hum vibration that sounds like a truck running outside. This noise makes sleep difficult,” reads the letter the Mausolf’s wrote March 10.
That letter, in addition to the one written by the Webers, was obtained by the Tribune in March via a Freedom of Information Act request.
At the time county officials were discussing how to address the complaints, Huron County Building and Zoning Director Russ Lundberg noted the issue of measuring sound emitted from the turbines is more complex than just taking out a decibel reader to measure whether noise levels at/near Michigan Wind 1 exceed limits set in the county’s zoning ordinance.
Sound is measured by using units of decibels (dB), and A-weighting which compensates for the sensitivity of human hearing. A-weighted sound levels are measured by dB(A).
The county’s zoning ordinance’s primary noise standard states noise generated by an operating wind turbine can not exceed 50 dB(A) at all nearby sensitive receptor locations, which includes residents. The ordinance includes a second standard of ambient +5 dB(A), meaning at times sounds created by a wind turbine may cause total ambient noise to exceed 50 dB(A).
In March, Lundberg explained at some locations, particularly during late and early hours, operations of a wind turbine facility significantly increase ambient noise levels. For example, on a night with low wind speeds and little traffic and other outside activity, there may be an ambient rating of 20 dB(A). That rating may double when turbines are in operation, however, the overall limit of 50 dB(A) is not exceeded, though the noise of the wind park is noticeable.
In the daytime, particularly when there’s increased wind speeds, there’s other ambient noise — such as leaves rustling in the wind, cars on the road, tractors in fields, etc. — the sounds of a turbine in operation may not even be noticeable because it’s drowned out by the other ambient noise.
With this in mind, the issue is how to determine whether the 50 dB(A) levels are being exceeded and if so, whether it’s being exceeded by the actual turbines themselves or by a combination of the turbines and other existing ambient noise sources.
Because wind projects have to submit a noise study to prove a wind farm will not exceed the 50 dB(A) limit, the county’s assumption is it’s not the turbines themselves that are exceeding the 50 dB(A) level, Lundberg previously noted. But how to check this assumption is the question officials were mulling over in March.
That is because in order to check the wind park’s noise levels, the other ambient noises would have to be identified through a noise study.
Previously discussed avenues
During March’s discussion, it was noted the county has three possible options. First, the county could have John Deere Wind Energy conduct a wind study, Lundberg said. Another option for the county would be to go it alone, by purchasing the necessary decibel metering equipment and have Lundberg learn the noise consulting expertise needed to conduct a noise study.
The third option would be for the county to hire an independent noise consultant study to conduct a post-construction noise study, which would be paid for post-construction fees (of $400 per turbine) that already are built in the county’s ordinance to fund post-construction reviews.
The planning commission included those fees for post-construction matters so it would not take any money away from the county’s general fund if additional review is required after a wind park has been developed, Lundberg explained in March.
During March’s discussion, it appeared the board favored pursuing the first option that’s a teamwork approach with John Deere Wind Energy.
Since that meeting, Huron County Commissioner Kurt Damrow — who chairs the Legislative Committee, which has been charged with following up on this issue — has said the county planning commission more than likely will make an amendment to the county’s wind ordinance to include a section that deals with how to address complaints made after a wind park’s constructed.
“We just want to work with the planning commission to come up with a … thorough and specific procedure,” Damrow said.
He noted identifying and correcting any problems a wind farm may be causing will only benefit the wind park’s purchaser and developer. That is because the projects currently are under warranty and any repairs/replacements that need to be made will be covered by under warranty from the turbine’s manufacturer for the first year or two after the project’s been constructed, Damrow said.
Questions he said need to be addressed include what is a legitimate complaint, and what — if any — burden should be placed on the developer as far as proving the wind farm is in compliance with the zoning ordinance.
Another solution Damrow said has been proposed is increasing the county’s setback distance, which is the minimum distance a turbine can be placed to an existing structure, from 1,000 feet to 1,320 feet.
Damrow said this is a standard DTE Energy officials told him they would be on board with. He added existing wind farms will be grandfathered in at the current 1,000-foot setback.
Also, Damrow said the county’s discussed obtaining a meter to get an immediate readout of sound so the county could independently monitor sound levels.
Damrow said the county needs the business the wind industry has given the area, however, the well-being of the residents cannot be compromised if developers cannot meet the established wind ordinance in Huron County.
“They’ll have to do whatever it takes to make sure they meet the ordinance requirements,” Damrow said. “We don’t want any undue burden on our residents, and we’ll do everything we can to help everyone.”
The Questions
1. Does the county have the ability to monitor the county’s zoning ordinances on the noise level?
2. Has John Deere Wind Energy been in compliance with the noise level ordinance since they began operation?
3. How is John Deere Wind Energy going to maintain the turbine noise at or below the ordinance?
4. What method of documentation is going to be used to show compliance?
5. Has the noise level been above the ordinance maximum level?
6. What monitoring method is being used to ensure the noise level is not exceeded?
7. What is the county’s ordinance on inaudible low frequency noise waves?
By Kate Hessling
4 June 2009
6/21/09 What's the Big Deal? Wind Turbine Noise, Stress, and Human Health
Wind Power Blues: Toronto doctor warns that, if not properly controlled, the noise from wind turbines could make people sick -- literally
By Lorrie Goldstein
21 June 2009
Since the debate over wind turbines and whether they negatively impact on human health is heating up in Ontario, let’s talk to an expert on the relationship between noise and stress.
Toronto psychiatrist Dr. Irvin Wolkoff is a recognized authority on this subject and has testified on it as an expert witness in court.
(Full disclosure: Dr. Wolkoff and I are friends, but his professional views are his own.)
Wolkoff notes there has been little independent, credible research on the specific issue of wind turbine noise and what, if any, impact it has on human health. That research should be undertaken immediately, he said.
However, much is known about the impact of noise in general on health, so it’s not as if we’re starting from scratch.
The first thing people need to understand about noise and stress, Wolkoff said, is that many factors now being hotly debated — low versus high frequency noise, precise decibel levels, whether one person compared to another finds a particular noise stressful — aren’t the key ones.
“When it comes to noise and how it potentially affects human beings, the two main ’stressors’ are whether the noise is meaningful or meaningless to the person hearing it, and whether or not the individual can control it,” Wolkoff explained.
He uses a familiar example to illustrate the point.
“Say I’m in my home playing my favourite music loudly,” Wolkoff said. “To me, the noise isn’t stressful because it’s meaningful — I like it — and I can control it .
“But my next-door neighbour may be very stressed by my music, because it’s meaningless to him — it’s my favourite record, not his — and because he can’t control it.”
NOT EVERYONE AFFECTED
Similarly, some people living near wind turbines and wind farms could genuinely find the noise stressful, even if others don’t.
To tell those affected by the noise “it’s all in their head” would be true in the sense the brain affects the body, Wolkoff notes, but the added implication that the stress they are feeling must be imaginary, is incorrect.
In fact, people could be genuinely stressed even if, as the government describes it, the decibel level from the turbines is similar to “a quiet office or library,” particularly because wind power is intermittent and the turbines start and stop unpredictably.
On the other hand, these affected residents could have friends visiting with them who aren’t stressed by exactly the same noise, because it’s meaningful to them — perhaps they support generating energy from wind — and because they can control it, if by no other method than driving home.
However, when noise does cause genuine stress, Wolkoff emphasizes, the adverse health effects are well known .
Even short-term exposure can result in sleeplessness, irritability, impaired functioning and inability to concentrate.
In practical terms, Wolkoff says, parents stressed by noise will not be able to care for their children as well as they otherwise would. Similarly, children under stress will not be able to concentrate, or learn, as well.
The long-term effects of exposure to unwelcome, uncontrollable noise can be extremely serious, Wolkoff said.
Prolonged stress triggers the release of too much adrenaline and hydrocortisone in the body.
Adrenaline raises blood pressure and can eventually result in arteriosclerosis (hardening of the arteries), heart disease, heart attack and stroke. Hydrocortisone suppresses the immune system and can lead to a greater risk of infections and even cancer.
On the issue of wind turbines themselves, Wolkoff is an agnostic.
He’s seen well-designed wind farms on the tops of mountains in Spain that were clearly built to minimize any potential negative impacts on people. On the other hand, he once visited a wine-growing region in Austria where a single wind turbine had the locals up in arms about its perceived negative impacts on their town.
“All I did was mention I thought it was great they had a wind turbine generating electricity and the response from these normally calm, lovely people was utter fury,” Wolkoff said. “It took me completely by surprise.”
Premier Dalton McGuinty, who originally warned he would not tolerate NIMBYism (”not-in-my-back-yard-syndrome”) in the growth of renewable energy in Ontario, has recently taken a somewhat less confrontational approach, proposing, under Ontario’s Green Energy Act, a minimum setback for wind turbines of 550 metres, and up to 1.5 km, depending on numbers and noise levels.
As Wolkoff puts it: “Making electrical power out of thin air sounds like a beautiful dream. But it must not be allowed to become a nightmare for the real people living near wind turbines.”