Better Plan, Wisconsin

Turbines along the Horicon Marsh 2008 photo by wind farm resident, Gerry Meyer

Water Woes, Wind Turbines, Threatening Horicon Marsh, Report Says

June 20, 2009

Wisconsin State Journal [click here to read at source]

Nearby wind turbines, declining water quality and decreasing water levels at Horicon National Wildlife Refuge in southeastern Wisconsin earned the popular birders’ destination the dubious distinction of being ranked the third most imperiled refuge in the nation, according to a list compiled by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

Released every year and based on interviews with refuge staff, the list ranks the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska and the Hawaii Islands National Wildlife Refuge Complex as the first and second most threatened refuges. PEER is a national alliance of local, state and federal natural resource professionals.

Located about 40 miles northeast of Madison, the 23,375-acre Horicon refuge is famous as one of the largest freshwater cattail marshes in the U.S. It’s an important migratory stopover in the spring for migratory waterfowl and has long been noted for the huge numbers of Canada geese — as many as 300,000 in the spring — that make the marsh a noisy place during their migrations.

But, according to the PEER report, pollution from the Rock River, which both feeds the marsh and drains large agricultural areas upstream, is poisoning the marsh with silt, phosphorus and agricultural chemicals. Silt carried by the river is clogging ditches and carrying nutrients that promote weed growth and cause cattail mats to grow out of control.

“In effect,” the report said, “the marsh is filling from the bottom up.”

A relative new issue for the marsh is the nearby construction of hundreds of wind turbines that may pose a threat to migrating birds. A company called Forward Energy received final permission from the Wisconsin Public Service Commission in 2005 to erect 133 wind turbines on the edges of the marsh. The turbines, 86 of which are already in operation, are 390 feet high from the base to the tip of their blades.

The uncertain impact of the wind turbines prompted another organization, the National Wildlife Refuge Association, to name Horicon one of the nation’s most endangered refuges in a list released four years ago.

Laura Miner, who oversees the turbines for Forward Energy, said the company is midway through a two-year mortality study at Horicon. So far, the results are “not alarming,” she said. During a four-month period last fall, researchers recovered less than 10 bird carcasses and about 70 bat carcasses near the turbines.

“We think the bird number is relatively low, and we have found no carcasses of federally protected species,” Miner said.

Diane Kitchen, assistant refuge manager for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, said many refuges across the nation are facing water issues, both related to quality and quantity. “We have trials, like every refuge does,” she said.

As for the wind farms, Kitchen said it is too soon to determine whether the huge turbines pose a real threat to migrating birds.

The PEER report called for the following actions to lessen the threats to the refuge:

• Existing cooperation with farmers and agricultural agencies should be expanded to reduce water pollution problems.
• A 21st century marsh-management plan should be developed, funded and staffed.
• Scientific reviews should be conducted to help plan its future. Such studies should include research on wind turbines, which is already underway, and studies of hydrological problems by the U.S. Geological Survey.

— State Journal reporter Doug Erickson contributed to this report.

By Ron Seely

Wisconsin State Journal

20 June 2009

Click on the image above to learn more about Wisconsin's Horicon Marsh, the largest cattail marsh in the U.S, and about the Forward Energy wind farm sited alongside it. [You can also see the video by clicking here]

A CLOSER LOOK AT THE BIRD AND BAT MORTALITY STUDY:

The developer wanted to site turbines just 1.2 miles from the marsh.

Environmental groups asked for setbacks of at least four miles.

In its final decision, the PSC chose two miles as the setback and agreed to reconsider the 1.2 mile set-back some time in the future.

The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, it its decision to allow Invenergy's Forward energy project to be sited just 2 miles from the marsh, acknowledged studies which confirmed that "birds visit the wind farm site very heavily during migration seasons, and that the proximity to the marsh could cause greater than average avian mortality." (Docket 9300-CE-100 PSC Ref#37618, p.16)

But the financial concerns of the wind developer trumped the protection of birds and bats, citing the wind developer's fast-approching production tax credit deadline and concluding that more comprehensive pre-construction avian studies were not necessary or in the public interest. (Docket 9300-CE-100 PSC Ref#37618, P. 17)

The PSC also gave the developers a pass on bat studies, though one of the largest bat hibernacula in the state is located not far from the marsh.

The wind developer's paid witness, testified that pre-construction bat studies had not been required elsewhere, but at the Buffalo Ridge project in Minnesota no relationship between bat activity and mortality could be observed. (p.21)

The PSC agreed, and no pre-construction bat surveys were done. Instead, the PSC offered this trade off:

"The commission... finds that post-construction mortality research will advance scientific knowledge about the potential impacts of wind farms upon bat poplulations"

They now a have plenty of dead Wisconsin bats to work with.

Here are some of the protocols of this study:

(We thank the concerned party who passed this document to us for consideration. Download complete document by clicking here)

The search area around a turbine is defined by a 525 ft by 525 ft square, in which the turbine constitutes the center of the square.--

In other words, only carcasses found 260.5 feet in any direction from the turbine are considered.

The turbine's blade span is approximately 260.5 feet.

The tip speed averages over 100 mph.

A bird or a bat hit by a blade going 100 mph and knocked out of this search area would not be considered.

The people employed to search for caracsses are instructed to "Store the plastic zip-loc containing the carcass in the freezer at the wind company building upon completing searches for the day"

(Emphasis added) SCROLL DOWN to read the entire carcass collecting protocol sheet.

NOTE FROM THE BPRC RESEARCH NERD: It's hard not to have concerns about the wisdom of simply dropping off the carcasses at the 'wind company building'. It seems that an independently maintained site would be more a reliable depository.

(CLICK HERE FOR MARCH 7th 2009 news story)

LOOKING FOR A GREEN JOB?

In August of 2008, one of the 'green jobs' to be had involved walking six acres around five industrial scale wind turbines in the Forward Energy wind farm, looking for dead bats and birds.

The job paid $10.00 an hour plus mileage.

Click on the image above to see a video shot by some one who has this green job, telling us what her mornings near turbines were like, and gives us an candid look at just how post-construction avian and bat mortality studies are being conducted.

UPDATE: Since we posted this, the video has been pulled. Transcript of video below

The video is called, "What has been keeping me busy?" and does not appear to anything but an amiable personal video intended to update friends and interested parties. The dull roaring in the background is the turbine sound. It is sometimes faint, but always present.

The image below is the site map of the project. The two blue circles are the locations of specific turbines she mentions.

TRANSCRIPT:

"Good Morning.
It is now five am.
I'm going to show you what I've been doing lately that I haven't been on line. It's been awhile since I've been here, but I want to show you what I'm doing so you'll understand.

I don't know if you can hear the noise behind me but I am at..... I will show you... hold on a minute... we're going to go up, and we're going to go up, and we're going to go up, and you see those blades?

I am at the wind turbines.

There's one over there you can see a little better. And I am looking for dead birds and bats. And they've been finding bats lately. So we got some areas to walk and check for dead birds. And, let's go.

There's more wind turbines. More wind turbines. I'm checking the roads to see if there's any dead birds or bats. The sunrise is starting to come. Pretty.

But I get up at three thirty, every morning. Seven days a week. Get paid ten dollars an hour plus mileage. Let's look over here. Let's see if we can see those wind turbines over there. Just fields and fields of them.

So let's start looking. And if I find anything, I'll let you know.

There's a turbine I am checking. And what we have to do is, they have plowed or mowed areas for us to walk and we check both sides, and they go -- oh, four or five of them that we have to walk down and check for the birds. They have been finding a lot of bats. So that's what we're looking for.

Look at the sunrise. Beautiful. So peaceful out here in the morning.

Well we didn't find anything here, so we head to our next turbine. See you when we get there.

All right. We are at wind turbine 83. That last one we were at was 96. So we're going to check around here and see what we can find. And there's a lot more turbines up in this area so I can show you those.

They're going to build a hundred and thirty-six turbines...... the hill is just filled with them here....
there's one there, a whole field of them over there.

We're going to be looking in corn this time. Last time we were looking in soy. So let's head to the cornfields.

That turbine is pretty close to this one. Look at those blades. We're right under them. Yes, we're right in the middle of a corn field. This is sweet corn.
You can tell by tassels on top. They're whiter. Field corn is a darker brown. So this is sweet corn we're in. And you can hear the birds chirping.

And there's the wind turbine I'm checking right now.

I got to walk all the way down there. Actually at each turbine, you're walking six acres. Getting a lot of exercise.

There's my next turbine.

I know I look a mess. It's 95 percent humidity out there and right now it's 84 degrees. And with my hat on I was sweating up a storm. But I need to call Steve. He's a gentleman from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. And he's the one that hired me. They're doing a study for bats and birds by the wind turbines.

And we're also working with Forward Wind Project. And they're really nice guys.

OK I got a couple of more turbines to check-- and I'm going to say good-bye now and unless I find something I'll see you later. Buteverybody have a great day and we'll talk to all of you later. Bye.

(Later)

Good morning everyone..... I'm out doing another search this morning, and I'm actually having a lot of fun. Getting a lot of exercise. Walking six acres each turbine, times five, it's 30 acres I'm walking. So I'm getting a lot of exercise and I'm enjoying it.

I got a bat yesterday but my camera battery was dead so, sorry, couldn't get it to you. But, um, the wind turbines do not hit the bats with the blades.
If you're squeamish, and don't like to hear things happening to animals, skip the next 30 seconds.

[She pauses]


What's happening to the bats is they are getting sucked in and their insides are imploding. So. Yeah.

They are not getting hit by the turbines, they are getting sucked in by them and their insides just explode... imploding. So that's what's happening to those bats.

I haven't found any regular birds yet, but when I do they'll check those out too. They'll autopsy those.

The gentleman I'm working for, Steve, is working on his masters at the University of Madison. And his roommate who he's living with now is also going to school for wildlife...... preservation.

And he's doing a study on bats, so he's the one who did the autopsies on the bats and told us what is happening, actually. He is not finding any blade marks on them.

They kind of figured that's what's happening, because of what's happening, they found out they are imploding when they did the autopsy.

Yeah. How weird.

They are just getting sucked in and the pressure is so much that that's what's happening.

So I am on my way to my next turbine, and if I do find anything today, I'll show you.

Researchers say a pressure drop created by turbines can cause bats' lungs to burst
March 1, 2009 by Gerry Smith in Chicago Tribune
The mystery was alarming to wildlife experts: large numbers of dead bats appearing at wind farms, often with no visible signs of injury.

Researchers now think they know one reason: Wind turbines cause bats' lungs to explode. More specifically, a sudden drop in air pressure created by the blades can cause fatal internal hemorrhaging, researchers at the University of Calgary said in a study.

The toll taken on bats highlights a delicate balance facing the wind industry-how to be "green" without causing other unintended environmental consequences.

Some of the best sources of wind-coastlines and mountaintops-also happen to be in the path of migratory birds. Wind farms installed on mountain ridges also have triggered fears over soil erosion, and some environmental groups-citing land use laws designed to keep Mother Nature unspoiled-have fought proposed wind farms.

With the deaths causing a stir among wildlife advocates, an unusual partnership called the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative is seeking ways to strike a delicate balance between protecting the bat population and meeting the nation's growing demand for renewable energy.

"We support the development of clean energy, but to make it 'green' we have to do everything we can to minimize the environmental impacts," said Ed Arnett, project coordinator for the cooperative.

Some wind experts dismiss fears over turbines' impact on wildlife. They point to a 2007 study by the National Academy of Sciences that concluded far more birds and bats have been killed in collisions with vehicles and buildings than in collisions with turbines.

But wildlife experts are particularly protective of bats because the mammals have low reproductive rates, meaning even small numbers of fatalities can affect their populations.

"Once you start taking a small number of bats out of the general population, the risk of endangerment or extinction vastly increases," said Joseph Kath, the endangered species project manager for the Illinois Department of Natural Resources.

Thus far, there have been no reports of endangered or threatened bat species being killed at wind farms in North America. Most bats felled by turbines have been migrating species like hoary bats, eastern red bats and silver-haired bats.

The concern over bats is fairly recent. Since the 1980s, when wind farms were in their infancy, wildlife biologists have been more worried about protecting birds from spinning turbines. Bat deaths at wind farms largely went unnoticed.

Then in 2003, researchers stumbled upon an estimated 1,400 to 4,000 bat carcasses at the Mountaineer Wind Energy Center in West Virginia and recorded extensive bat fatalities at wind farms in Pennsylvania and Tennessee.

Wildlife experts were taken by surprise.

"These are unforeseen circumstances," Arnett said. "Most of us didn't anticipate this being a problem."

Since then, the chorus of voices calling for greater protection for bats at wind farms has grown louder. Last summer, the American Society of Mammalogists called for wind farms to avoid "bat hibernation, breeding and maternity colonies."

Still, the explanation for why bats with no external signs of injury were being found dead at wind farms was largely a mystery until August.

That's when researchers at the University of Calgary reported that 90 percent of bats felled near one wind farm showed signs of barotrauma, or fatal internal hemorrhaging, of the lungs that occurred because of drops in air pressure near the spinning blades.

The condition affects bats more than birds because bird lungs are more rigid and can withstand sudden changes in air pressure, according to the study, which was published in the journal Current Biology.

The study may explain why bat fatalities often outnumber bird fatalities at wind farms. In Illinois, it is estimated three times as many bats (93) as birds (31) died during a year at the 33-turbine Crescent Ridge Wind Farm in Bureau County, a consulting firm reported last year.

The firm, Curry & Kerlinger, deemed the findings "small and not likely to be biologically significant."

But given a decline in several bat species in the eastern United States, "the possibility of population effects, especially with increased numbers of turbines, is significant," the National Academy of Sciences study stated.

Illinois is expected to increase the number of wind farms dramatically in coming years. The state has mandated that 25 percent of its electricity be generated by renewable resources by 2025, with about 75 percent of that renewable energy coming from wind. Illinois has 915 megawatts of capacity installed with the capacity to build 9,000 megawatts.

Arnett said the cooperative doesn't discount the Calgary study but has conducted studies of its own, using night-vision cameras, that found bats also have been killed by collisions with turbine blades.

There are several theories as to why bats might be flying close to turbines. Some think bats might confuse turbines with large, dead trees because many species found dead use such trees to roost. Others hypothesize that turbines may attract insects, which attract hungry bats.

The cooperative has been looking for ways to bring down the death toll, including studies of the effectiveness of ultrasonic sounds that would deter bats and curtailing the spinning of turbines until it's too windy for bats to fly.

Arnett said the latter step may have some economic consequences. But he expressed confidence that the wind industry can continue to grow without harming bat populations.

"It's not choosing one or the other," Arnett said. "It's finding a balance, and I'm convinced we can solve this problem."

Web link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/lifestyle/g...

EXTRA CREDIT:

Here's how the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service website describes the Horicon Marsh:

"At over 32,000 acres in size, Horicon Marsh is the largest freshwater cattail marsh in the United States. The marsh provides habitat for endangered species and is a critical rest stop for thousands of migrating ducks and Canada geese. It is recognized as a Wetland of International Importance, as both Globally and State Important Bird Areas and is also a unit of the Ice Age Scientific Reserve."

The Wisconsin DNR says:

"While this marsh in renown for its migrant flocks of Canada geese, it is also home to more than 290 kinds of birds which have been sighted over the years. Due to its importance to wildlife, Horicon Marsh has been designated as a "Wetland of International Importance" and a "Globally Important Bird Area." Horicon Marsh is both a state wildlife area and national wildlife refuge"

The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, it its decision to allow Invenergy's Forward energy project to be sited just 2 miles from the marsh, acknowledged studies

Here's the complete protocol for the bird and bat mortality data for the Forward Energy wind farm along the Horicon Marsh:

I. Defining the Search Area:

A. The search area around the turbines is defined by a 525 ft by 525 ft square, in which the turbine constitutes the center of the square.

All of the plots are located within active agricultural fields throughout northern Dodge and Southern Fond Du Lac counties.

The total area of the plot is equivalent to 6.3 acres; the corners of the square are marked by 6 foot bamboo stakes with iridescent marking tape.

The transects cut into the square represent the 1.1 acre search area searchers are responsible for. Plots that are not at the proper vegetation height to be cut will contain two bamboo stakes 15 feet apart on both sides of the square.

These stakes create a lane in which searches should take place; these lanes will later be mowed when the vegetation height is at the proper level.

There are a total of five mowed transects within the plot, and the sixth transect is made up of the access road leading up to the turbine and an extension of this access road mowed in the plot.

The transects are approximately 525 feet long. Each segment born perpendicularly from the access road and its extension are half the length of the transect, or 262.5 feet.

Maps will be provided on the back of the data sheet with significant land marks, property lines, crop types, and the search transects and the access road with its mowed extension denoted.

While most of the transects are cut perpendicular to the access road and the access road extension, exceptions will be noted on the map for the specific turbine.

II. Data Collection: Pre-Search
1. Searcher: Record your name, including first and last name
2. # of Searchers: Record number of searchers, if alone record “1”
3. Turbine #: Record proper turbine number
4. Date: Record date
5. Start Time, End Time & Total Time: Record the time at which you start and finish the search, then subtract to determine total
6. Wind Condition: Record the wind condition on site, choosing from three codes
a.Calm (C) : Air is still, no vegetation movement, no feeling of a breeze
b.Light (L) : Slight breeze, approximately 1 - 15 mph, vegetation waving
c. Strong (S) : Obvious stronger winds, pre-storm weather conditions, 15 mph and up, heavy gusts of wind
4. Cloud Cover: Determine and record cloud cover, choosing from three codes
3a. Clear (CL) : No visible clouds in sky, “blue” skies
b.Partly Cloudy (PC) : Some clouds, not stormy but simply cloudy, some sunshine
c. Overcast (O) : Many clouds in sky, often grey, pre-storm or pre-rain weather conditions
*Do not confuse morning fog with clouds, skies may not necessarily be overcast when fog is present
5. Is the top of the turbine visible?
a. Circle “YES” if the top of the turbine is visible (no low-lying fog)
b. Circle “NO” if the top of the turbine is not visible (fog is at least 200 feet off the ground, generally foggy at ground level
6. Precipitation
a. Circle “YES” if there is precipitation of any degree
b. Circle “NO” if there is no precipitation
III. Searching
A. The searcher is to walk the 6 transects, consisting of 5 mowed or staked transects and the access road and its extension. While walking the transects, search the ground covering the entire 15 foot wide transect for dead birds and bats. Keep an eye out for abnormalities in shape and color on the ground substrate.
B. Walk at a pace conducive to the likelihood of finding carcasses, approximately 15 to 30 minutes per turbine depending on plot design.
IV.Collecting
A. Upon locating a carcass, record the Carcass Condition Rating
1. Carcass Condition Rating

a. Fresh (1) : The bird or bat appears to have recently expired, limited decomposition or scavenger impact, relatively decent condition

b. One to 2 days old (2) : Partially scavenged, usually by insects and their larvae, slightly decomposed but still in reasonably good condition

c. Decomposed (3) : The carcass has obviously been on the ground for a while, often decomposed down to fur/feathers and bones

d. Canʼt Be Determined (4) : The rating of the carcass can not be determined due to factors such as heavy rains, flooding, human interference, etc...

B. If camera is available, take a picture of carcass where it lies as well as a picture with the wind turbine in the background and the carcass in the foreground for estimating distance

C. Indicate the approximate position of the carcass in relation to the turbine by placing the number of the carcass in a square on the grey scale transect, each representing 15 feet, at the estimated distance from the turbine (Refer to Fig.1)

D. Next place the carcass in a zip-loc plastic bag and label the bag with the Carcass ID

1. Carcass ID

a. The Carcass ID consists of a single number composed of the turbine #, the date, and the # of the carcass in order of carcasses found that day. The count for carcasses
are renewed each day. For example, if 2 bats are found on the same day, at turbine 37 on August 2, 2008, the Carcass IDs would appear like so:
37-8/2/2008-1
37-8/2/2008-2

E. Store the plastic zip-loc containing the carcass in the freezer at the wind company building upon completing searches for the day (Be sure to label all bags properly
before placing in freezer)

V. Data Collection: Post Search

A. Vegetation/Visibility Scale

1. Good (1) : Transects do not need mowing, carcasses visible, easily found

2. Needs mowing in a few days (2) : Carcasses becoming harder to find, level of vegetation impairing (usually with hay, grass, and alfalfa)

3. Needs mowing ASAP (3) : Carcasses underneath vegetation, vegetation height higher than 6 inches, dense vegetation

PROTOCOL SUBJECT TO CHANGE AMENDMENTS WILL BE MADE AND SEARCHERS WILL BE PROPERLY NOTIFIED AND TRAINED, AS THE STUDY EXISTS IN AN ADAPTIVE PROGRESSION

For more information: Refer to Data Sheet Example

Store the plastic zip-loc containing the carcass in the freezer at the wind company building upon completing searches for the day (Be sure to label all bags properly
before placing in freezer)

With the passage of the Turbine Siting Reform Bill out of committee yesterday, AB 256 takes another step closer to becoming law. [click here to download AB 256]

Many people thoughout our state have been working to get our legislators to look a little more deeply into this issue and respond to the mounting evidence and peer reviewed reports of adverse health effects from badly sited turbines.

Three reports, created specifically to guide legislators in wind turbine siting decisions, and alert them to areas of concern, all identify a half mile as the minimum setback needed to mitigate problems from turbine noise and shadow flicker.

The Reports include:

The National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies of Science Report "Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects". (2007) [Download Document]

The Congressional Research Service Report prepared for Members and Committees of Congress "Wind Power in the United States: Technology, Economic, and Policy Issues (2008) [Download document]

The Minnesota Department of Health, Environmental Health Division In response to a request from: Minnesota Department of Commerce, Office of Energy Security: "Public Health Impacts of Wind Turbines" (2009) [Download Document]

We thank all who continue to take the time to help our legislators understand what a serious issue this is.

Below is a letter sent to assembly members of the Energy and Utilities committee regarding Turbine Siting Reform. We thank the Kunz family for allowing us to share their letter here.

May 22, 2009

Dear Committee on Energy Chairman Rep. James Soletski,

The current wind turbine siting procedures have not been based on facts, studies, research not there before wind turbines were put up.

Many local governments have adopted more reasonable wind turbine ordinances that protect the citizens from adverse health effects not only in Wisconsin but many other states.

The PSC should not be allowed to trump the hard work of local governments.

To ignore "we the people" and the local government that have followed the problems with wind energy systems based on facts for the last five years.

These problems will not be going away if the PSC has siting rule but in fact will multiply as more wind turbines are added to Wisconsin, especially in high populated areas.

As you may well know we would need 12,000 to 14,000 wind turbines to meet RES for 2024.

We currently have 305 wind turbines.

They produce only a trickle of energy and on some days use more than they produce.

They use electricity when the wind isn't blowing because otherwise the blades could warp.

The wind industry does not seem to want to disclose their usage or wind speed data and I imagine there is a reason for that.

There have been a lot of unanswered questions when dealing with industrial sized wind turbines especially foreign-made products --resulting in moratoriums and Ac Hoc committees to advise local officials based information from a variety of experts with credible backgrounds.

One such study at the State level is a white page report done by the Minnesota Department of Health called: "Impacts of Wind Turbines on Public HealthImpacts of Wind Turbines " that our State of Wisconsin should closely look at to promulgate rules that the PSC has failed to do nor shows any consideration to do so.

The Minnesota Public Health dept. report substantiates why at least a 1/2 milessetback is needed for large industrial sized wind turbines.

Knowledge is the key to a successful well-planned wind power plant.

Your vote reflects your knowledge of the issues for all the citizens for the entire State of Wisconsin.

The failure of the PSC and the wind industry to consider all the citizens has resulted in the stalled projects.

Yet the PSC, wind industry and promoters of wind projects such as Renew and Clean Wisconsin will not even listen to the people or to acknowledge and correct the siting mistakes.

I hope that is not the case with State Government Officials from every district, county, city, town or farm and especially you on the committee for energy.

This is a very important issue and deserves your attention.

The ruining of lives must stop and is a serious matter for those living too close to wind turbine. Please oppose the wind turbine siting bill in its present form.

Thank you,

Richard Kunz
Chilton, WI

[NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: Though wind developers continue to insist that shadow flicker is not a significant problem and only lasts for a few minutes each day, one of the findings in the Minnesota Department of Health white paper is that turbines sited closer than 2640 feet east or west of a residence means that home can have one and a half hours of shadow flicker a day.

Wisconsin residents living in PSC-approved wind farms have reported shadow flicker lasting even longer and are being driven from their homes during the periods of shadow flicker.

Click on the image below to see what shadow flicker looks like and imagine it lasting for an hour and half in your home each day. This footage was shot by residents of the PSC-approved wind farm near the Town of Byron, Wisconsin)

Please consider taking a moment to call or send an email to

Representative Sheridan (Speaker)

(608) 266-7503  Rep.sheridan@legis.wisconsin.gov

and Representative Nelson (Majority Leader)

(608) 266-2418 Rep.nelson@legis.wisconsin.gov

Please ask them to put AB 256 on hold until questions about the issues of health and safety can be more throughly examined and resolved.

Ask them to please do the math: If the state needs to site 12,000-14,000 turbines by 2024, tens of thousands of Wisconsin residents will be affected by this legislation. We need to make sure we get it right.

Today the Assembly Bill 256 passed during an executive session held by the Assembly members of the Energy and Utilities committee.

AB 256 is the bill that will strip local governments of their power to regulate the siting of wind turbines in their municipalities and give this power to three appointed members of the Public Service Commission.

It will also over turn any large wind ordinances which have been adopted in our state.

There were a few amendments to the bill which we are still reviewing.

This is the letter Better Plan has sent to members of the committee who voted to pass the bill. [There were two votes against the bill, coming from Representatives Zigmunt and Peterson, to whom we sent our thanks]

Dear Representative,

I attended the executive session today.

For those of us there who are deeply concerned about how AB 156 will strip power from local government and give the power to regulate wind turbines in our state to three appointed members of the PSC, -- with no real checks or balances in place— your yes vote was troubling.

I was dismayed to hear the ordinances already passed in our state will not be allowed to stand if this bill passes as written and that a local government will have no right to appeal this.

The six Towns and two Counties who have passed ordinances which regulate wind energy systems for reasons of health and safety followed the letter of the statute as written. It seems these ordinances should at least be challenged on their merits and not simply overturned.

I’m not sure if you know that an open records request from the Town of Union (Rock County) found the PSC used no scientific or medical data to come up with its 1000 setbacks or 50dBA noise limits. Nor could it provide any supporting documentation.

On the other hand, the six Wisconsin Towns which have adopted ordinances with a 2640 foot setback are supported by the National Research Council (2007), the Congressional Research Service (2008) and a white paper issued by the Minnesota Department of Health (2009)

I hope you will consider an amendment which puts the issue of creating state setbacks and noise into the hands of the Wisconsin Department of Health, which is the appropriate agency to deal with this important issue.

As it stands, our state has just over 300 wind turbines. Most of these have only been operational for one year. 12,000 to 14,000 more turbines will need to be sited in our state by 2024 in order to meet the state mandates.

This means so many residents in our state will be affected by this that it’s vital that the health and safety issue be seriously addressed. AB 156 as written leaves a rather large elephant in the room. It would be good to settle this health and safety issue once and for all.

If you would like to speak directly to residents having trouble in PSC-approved wind farms in our state, there are a couple hundred of them who would be very glad to talk to you about what life has been like since the turbines went on line. I’d be glad to put you in touch with them.

Best to you, and though we don’t agree on this bill, I thank you for your work.

Lynda Barry-Kawula
Better Plan, Wisconsin
Wisconsin Tax-Payers for a Better Renewable Energy Plan
Betterplan.squarespace.com
PO Box 393
Footville, WI
53537

NOTE FROM BETTER PLAN: If you would like to contact members of the committee, click on the names below

Representative James Soletski

Representative Joe Parisi

Representative Phil Montgomery

Representaive Josh Zepnick

Representative Tony Staskunas

Representative Jon Richards

Representative John Steinbrink

Representative Joe Parisi

Representative Ted Zigmunt [voted against the bill]

Representative Michael Huebsch

Representaive Mark Honadel

Representative Kevin Petersen [voted against the bill]

Representative Zipperer

Click on the image below to see what PSC-approved setbacks look like in our state's newest wind farm:

On Wednesday at the Capitol in Madison, the Assembly Committee on Energy and Utilities will hold an Executive Session on Assembly Bill 256. [click here to download the bill]

This bill will strip local governments of their power to regulate the siting of industrial wind farms and give this power to three appointed members of the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin.

It will also overturn the six Town ordinances and two County ordinances created, approved and adopted by local governments in our state. These ordinances were created to protect resident's health and safety in response to the inadequate protections provided by the state in its draft model ordinance.

The state's draft model ordinance has since disappeared from the Wisconsin.gov website. [Better Plan still has a copy of this ordinance- click here to download]

The draft model ordinance lays out the PSC approved guidelines used in the wind farm siting disasters of Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties.

Trempealeau County is one of two counties in our state that adopted an ordinace which put public health and safety over wind developer's wishes. It's a solid ordinance which has been derided by wind developers and lobbyists but never challenged on its merits.

Below is testimony presented at the public hearing on this bill on May 12, 2009. It was given by Sister Betty Wolcott, a member of the Sisters of Saint Francis of Assisi Congregation, who was also a member of Trempealeau County’s Wind Energy Advisory Committee.

After you read it, please send an email to each of the committee members posted below this testimony to ask them not to support this bill as written, and to consider the message in the testimony of Sister Betty Wollcott.

Ask them not to pass legislation that would overturn ordinances created specifically to protect the health and safety of residents of our state, and instead have the courage to challenge these ordinances on their merits. Ask them to look more closely at the immediate benefits of promoting conservation and efficiency in our state.

Better Plan, Wisconsin is grateful for Sister Betty Wolcott's willingness to allow us to post her testimony here.

Testimony on the Proposed Uniform Wind Ordinance Bill for Wisconsin: SB 185/AB 256 –May 12, 2009

My name is Betty Wolcott.

I live near Osseo, Wisconsin, where I work with others in maintaining a natural area called The Woodlands.

For most of my life I have been an advocate for healthy and sustainable human-Earth relationships, thanks to my dear mother.

My congregation, the Sisters of St. Francis of Assisi, is committed to stopping global warming with a focus on energy conservation and efficiency.

I am a member of Trempealeau County’s Wind Energy Advisory Committee and I’m proud of the ordinance we developed for the purpose of protecting the public health and safety.

It was hopeful to work with citizens who cared enough to do the difficult research--research that extended over two years for some and for many of us over six months.

We learned that people who live near large wind turbine installations without adequate setback distances can suffer from sound, low frequency vibration, headaches, sleep disturbances and shadow flicker to name a few effects.

In addition to physical impacts are the psychic and spiritual effects of losing the peace and beauty of a cherished landscape. In response to these and many other concerns, we crafted an ordinance for Trempealeau County that we believe gives the public reasonable protections.

I am concerned that a Uniform Wind Ordinance Bill would deny citizens their right to have a voice and decision-making power in projects that greatly impact their lives and their unique environments.

This bill refers to areas where people live as “political subdivisions” but we are really talking about diverse communities of land, water, trees, people and all kinds of wildlife.

This legislation is about removing restrictions to the development of commercial wind systems.

I believe it feeds the illusion that we can solve energy needs and global warming by installing more wind turbines.

Many of us here and abroad are asking for more facts about wind energy. How efficient is it when the back up power is figured in? What are the cuts in greenhouse gas emissions? What are the health and safety impacts on people and the environment?

I feel we are dealing with a technology that is fast becoming outmoded. Smaller, more localized energy sources are being promoted as more practical, efficient and less invasive.

All across the world we are hearing from more and more people—including some leading environmentalists, experts in energy, ecology, and conservation -- that the cheapest, most effective and safest way to assure an adequate energy supply is to increase energy efficiency across all sectors of the economy.

The rewards are great: energy is saved, there is reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the results are lasting and there is minimal disruption of the environment.

We can pour all the clean energy we want into drafty homes and buildings and we can keep on using inefficient technologies and appliances and we will not reach our clean energy or greenhouse gas emissions goals.

Weatherizing homes and businesses, retrofitting, and changing to efficient machines and appliances will provide many with needed work, save energy and again be for the long term.

Of course we need some financial help to do that and while some will be provided in the stimulus bill it isn’t nearly enough to do what needs to be done. Until we do the conservation and efficiency work we won’t have data as to the amount of energy we really need to produce.

One further consideration that needs attention is the fact that weather patterns are changing due to climate change and wind currents are becoming more erratic and unpredictable. Recently wind speeds of 60mph were predicted and we were advised to tie everything down that could be blown around. This offers great challenges for large wind turbines.

People in local communities ask that their voices be respected; they know their areas and they know they are not the same across the State.

They need to be more fully engaged in solving our energy/global warming challenges. Having seen the devastating effects of global warming as he travels the world, Ban Ki Moon, Secretary General of the United Nations, advises: “We should remember the best minds are the farmers, doctors, and community leaders at the local level who have worked out ingenious solutions to urgent challenges.”

I believe we have a responsibility to future generations to leave them a world that runs more efficiently on less energy and that places a priority on health, safety, sustainability, diversity, birdsong and a beautiful clear sky.

This will take the goodwill, involvement, and wisdom of everyone.

An ordinance that gives a single commission the authority to approve the rules, regulate, and direct the appeals process is unworthy of our great state. Please do not vote for this bill. Thank you.

Betty Wolcott, OSF
Osseo, WI
May 12, 2009

Note from Better Plan: Please take a moment to send each of these Committee members an email urging them not to pass AB 256:

Committee Members to contact:

Click on the names below to send a message to

Representative James Soletski

Representative Joe Parisi

Representative Phil Montgomery

Representaive Josh Zepnick

Representative Tony Staskunas

Representative Jon Richards

Representative John Steinbrink

Representative Joe Parisi

Representative Ted Zigmunt

Representative Michael Huebsch

Representaive Mark Honadel

Representative Kevin Petersen

Representative Zipperer

On Wednesday, the Committee on Energy and Utilities will hold an executive session on AB 256 which is the bill that will strip local governments of their power to regulate the siting of wind turbines in their municipalities and give this power to three appointed members of the Public Service Commission.

[Click here to download the bill]

The Public Service Commission approved the siting of wind farms in Dodge and Fond du Lac counties which are proving to be a disaster for families whose homes are now 350 steps from industrial wind turbines that are 40 stories tall.

Six Towns in our state have adopted ordinances which, for reasons of health and safety, have setbacks of half a mile. Rather than challenging these ordinances on their merits, this bill simply overturns them and allows the PSC to site turbines as close as 1000 feet to the homes of unwilling landowners.

Please contact your legislators [click here] to let them know Assembly Bill 256 should not pass as written.

No town, village, city or county should be told to give up the right to protect and preserve the health and safety of residents from any public health impacts of an industry looking to be sited in their boundaries.

Below is the letter sent by Better Plan which addresses just one of the many concerns raised by this bill.

Dear Representative ,

As you may know, AB 256 (wind turbine siting reform) will be coming up for your vote soon.

AB 256 is missing some key checks and balances that must be corrected before this bill is passed into law.

Specifically, a local municipality must maintain the right to protect and preserve the public health and safety of its residents from public health impacts of any industry located within the boundary of the municipality.

As written, this bill removes that right and leaves nothing in its place.

An amendment is needed to preserve the right of municipalities to regulate the siting of wind turbines for reasons of public health and safety, and to establish an appeals process for aggrieved parties that goes before the Wisconsin Department of Health.

This is an issue of public health and safety and the Wisconsin Department of Health is the appropriate governing body.

An amendment is also needed to require the PSC to work with the Wisconsin Department of Health directly in order to address the issue of wind turbine impacts on public health and safety and to promulgate rules clearly supported by scientific and medical data.

A white paper issued on May 22, 2009 by the Minnesota Department of Health, Environmental Health Division, addresses Public Health Impacts of Wind Turbines and sets precedent for this.

Key Findings from the Minnesota Department of Health Report:

[click here to download full report]

--Problems with turbine noise in general, low frequency noise specifically and also trouble from shadow flicker are not a major concern at a setback of half a mile.

--There is nothing in the report which advocates a closer setback.

--Shadow flicker in homes is a bigger problem than predicted by the modeling software developers use, can last an hour and a half.

--The common calculations for predicting turbine noise are not adequate and because of this, noise levels are underestimated.

--Noise from wind turbines bothers people more quickly than noise at equal levels from traffic, planes or trains.

--The most common complaints from residents living within half mile are lack of sleep from turbine noise and also headaches. ( The report also addresses the same list of symptoms Reuters reports.)

--Turbines emit both high frequency and low frequency sounds. High frequency sounds can be lessened by walls and closed windows but low frequency sounds penetrate walls and windows easily.

The issue of wind turbine impacts on public health and safety is only just beginning to be understood and reported in the media.

“Given the mounting evidence indicating adverse effects that wind turbines can have on human health, it is critical that more research be conducted into adequate setback distances. With the emphasis that the world is placing on wind energy as a critical piece of our future energy puzzle, setback distance research would be time and money well spent to ensure that wind power grows in harmony with the environment and its citizens.”

-Reuters, June 8, 2009

Please amend the bill to include a provision that allows municipalities to retain their ability to protect the health of their residents, and provides an appellate body which is medically qualified to rule on issues of health and safety.

Click on the image below to see video from Wisconsin's newest wind farm. These setbacks were approved by the PSC. There are about 300 wind turbines currently sited in our state. The goal is to site 12,000 to 14,000 more. This means nearly every rural area in Wisconsin will be affected.