3/16/09 Wisconsin residents are speaking out against Plale bill.
Forward Energy Wind Farm, Town of Byron, Fond du Lac County, 2009
Red Alert, Wisconsin
A draft of a bill that would allow the Public Service Commission to repeat the wind turbine siting disasters in Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties has been introduced by Senator Jeff Plale, (D- South Milwaukee) (scroll to end of post to read more).
Wisconsin residents are speaking out about what the passage of this bill will mean for rural Wisconsin.
Wind power isn't so friendly
15 March 2009
The March 2 article stating that wind turbines will greatly reduce our dependence on foreign oil is misleading. Wind turbines produce electricity, and according to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, only about 1 percent of the state’s electricity is generated by burning oil.
In Wisconsin’s haste to promote wind energy, 215 turbines — each 400 feet tall — were built in the Fond du Lac area, with sites dictated by the state and wind developers. Residents’ concerns were ignored. Now, many living among the turbines describe the noise from the blade rotation as “jet like” and can be heard in their homes with windows closed. No one is listening to their pleas, just as their concerns were ignored.
Additionally, electricity derived from turbines is extremely expensive and unreliable. Because wind is intermittent, turbines produce electricity only about 25 percent of the time. Since Denmark enthusiastically promoted wind energy, its electricity rate has risen to 30 cents per kilowatt hour, about three times Wisconsin’s current rate.
Presently, Wisconsin wants more turbines along with control of the permitting process. We cannot afford such an expensive, unreliable source of energy nor have residents’ voices silenced by taking the permitting process away from our local communities.
Patricia Bal
Pulaski
15 March 2009
It should be noted that Senator Plale will have no wind turbines in his district, and no constituents who will be affected by this bill. The main impact will be on residents of rural Wisconsin.
Though the bill mentions no specifics about setbacks, noise limits, and other siting concerns, it is very clear about giving turbine siting approval to the PSC.
The PSC approved the siting of turbines 1000 feet from non-participating residents homes, and a noise limit of 50 decibels. Residents in the PSC approved wind farms of Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties are now having a hard time living with the disastrous results.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD A DRAFT OF SENATOR PLALE'S BILL
After you read it, please call your legislators (click here to find out who they are and how to contact them) and let them know if they want wind turbine siting reform, it should be based it on the Town of Union's Large Wind Ordinance, not a "recycled ordinance guidelines provided by an out-of-state utility"
The BPRC Research Nerd
3/14/09: NO FLY ZONE: Why small airplanes, emergency medical helicopters and wind turbines don't mix
NO FLY ZONE:
Fond du Lac County 2008
Better Plan received a letter from Reabe Spraying Service (Waupun) which explains the danger aerial applicators face when operating inside of wind farms. (click here to download original letter)
We thank Reabe Spraying Service for taking the time to write us this letter and for allowing us to share it here.
Dear Better Plan,
This letter is intended to inform you of Reabe Spraying Service’s perception of hazards to aerial applicators when operating in or near wind farm developments.
Large commercial wind farms create distraction, obstruction, and wake turbulence hazards that are life threatening to aerial applicators.
Modern wind turbines are very large structures, measuring app
roximately 400 feet high with a blade diameter of up to 270 feet. When you combine the physical size of these structures with blade rotation, the result is an object that captures your attention visually.
Aerial application operations take place at low levels near obstructions such as power lines, trees, and buildings. Aerial applicators must divide their attention between aircraft systems, treatment volumes, swath spacing, aircraft performance, weather, and obstruction avoidance.
When operating within a wind farm, the visual distraction created by the wind turbines further divides the pilot’s attention, exponentially increasing the likelihood of a life threatening error.
In a typical commercial wind farm there are approximately 2.5 turbines per square mile. In any given aerial application operation, a radius of one mile from the target site is utilized for maneuvering between swath runs, equating to an operations area of approximately three square miles.
This results in approximately seven turbines within the operations area.
Unlike other obstructions that aerial applicators must avoid, wind turbines are taller than the maximum height achieved during the turnaround. This means that a pilot never reaches a safe altitude allowing the pilot to check aircraft systems, treatment volumes, etc.
Simply said, the number and height of wind turbines within an aerial application area, exponentially increases the likelihood of a life threatening error.
Finally we come to the hazard of wake turbulence.This hazard is the most dangerous because it is invisible.
All airfoils in motion create wake turbulence.
The turbulence created is proportional to the weight and angle of attack of the airfoil; the heavier the weight and greater the angle of attack, the greater the wake turbulence.
A commercial wind turbine’s three blades can weigh as much as 40,000 pounds and operate at a very high angle of attack.
The result is turbulence severe enough to induce loss of control to an aerial application aircraft.
Again, this hazard is invisible and difficult to avoid while performing all of the other tasks necessary to perform an aerial application safely.
Due to the potential hazards mentioned above, Reabe Spraying Service has elected not to operate within the lateral boundaries of commercial wind farms.
Sincerely,
Tom Reabe
President, Reabe Spraying Service
Waupun, WI 53963
NOTE: This letter is similar to the one from Flight for Life emergency medical helicopter transport, explaining why they will not land in the PSC approved wind farm near the town of Byron Fond du Lac county. (Click here to download letter)
RED ALERT WISCONSIN!
A draft of a bill that would allow the Public Service Commission to repeat the wind turbine siting disasters in Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties has been introduced by Senator Jeff Plale, (D- South Milwaukee)
It should be noted that Senator Plale will have no wind turbines in his district, and no constituents who will be affected by this bill. The main impact will be on residents of rural Wisconsin.
Though the bill mentions no specifics about setbacks, noise limits, and other siting concerns, it is very clear about giving turbine siting approval to the PSC.
The PSC approved the siting of turbines 1000 feet from non-participating residents homes, and a noise limit of 50 decibels. Residents in the PSC approved wind farms of Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties are now having a hard time living with the disastrous results.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD A DRAFT OF SENATOR PLALE'S BILL
After you read it, please call your legislators (click here to find out who they are and how to contact them) and let them know if they want wind turbine siting reform, it should be based it on the Town of Union's Large Wind Ordinance, not a "recycled ordinance guidelines provided by an out-of-state utility"
(Click here to download the Union Ordinance)
Click on the image below to watch an interview with Wisconsin dairy and cash crop farmers who live inside the Fond du Lac County wind farm where Reabe used to operate. (Full transcript provided at end of post)
Click on image below to watch the second part of the interview.
TRANSCRIPT:
Life with Industrial Wind Turbines in Wisconsin Part 10
Ralph and Kevin Mittelstadt
Dairy Farmers
Fond du Lac County
April 2008
Q: You both farm-- a family farm. Diary Farm?
Kevin: Dairy and cash crop.
Q: And you also fly [airplanes]?
Both: Yes.
Q: What can you tell us about you experience with this development in this area from when it started until today?
Kevin: We gave it an open mind when they came, and we decided not to go with the developer when it came down to it.
Q: You hosted a met tower on your land?
Kevin: Yes
Ralph: For a little over two years.
Q: What was the experience like working with that company with the met tower, was it a good experience?
Ralph: There was no problem with the met tower and it didn't interfere with the land too much because we put it on one of the fence lines. Only the diagonal cables that come off-- we had to look out for when we worked around it.
Q: What were some of the issues you found with your decision to not host a turbine. Did they give you any problems when you decided that you didn't want to participate in the project?
Ralph: The company?
Q: Yes.
Ralph: Yeah, they were very negative to us. They actually come out and threatened me. "Either you do this or we're going to put them around you." And he told us if we don't sign the contract, "we're going to put them all around you and shut you right down"
Kevin:[Our first contact was when] We got a call from the company in Illinois in 2002 and one of the guys actually came out here and we didn't know what was going on, this was the first we ever heard of it. Basically they said they knew of our airstrip because it's on the map,
and that if we didn't go along with what they were going to do in the future, they would build around you.
Q: What was your primary reason for choosing not to participate with the tower? Was it because of your airstrip and how it would interfere with that?
Ralph: I think, if there was any reason, one was we'd lose too much farmland, it would create a problem with flying, because propellers create a vortex and your plane becomes unstable and it pulls you down, so now we can't spray our crops and we're damaging so much good farmland, so we figured it wouldn't be feasible to even go that way because we'd be losing too much in agriculture.
Q: Now you have wind turbine around you. We look out the window here and you've got one here and another one over there-- have they affected your flying? Have you flown with them up?
Kevin: You wouldn't want to fly down wind of them.
They place them far enough apart--[the turbines] themselves so they don't create turbulence between the two so you probably wouldn't want to fly in between there.
Q: So is your runway impacted by this type of development?
Kevin: Yeah. They actually hired a pilot that was one of the friends of one of the lawyers to testify to the PSC that he flew down by Paw Paw Illinois [where there are turbines] and it didn't affect him when he flew. He came and testified, he was at all the hearings saying that it wasn't a problem. Had these graphics. What it would look like to have one next to your runway. Claimed that the buildings are more of a problem for a runway than a wind turbine.
Q: Because of the air flow?
Kevin: Because of the close proximity of our runway to the hanger there. [He said] it would be more of an obstacle than a 400 foot wind turbine.
Q: You mentioned this in this area-- there's a lot of crop dusting?
Ralph: We did have a lot of cash cropping. Peas and sweet corn.
Q: Can you tell us how that's changed and how this type of development is going to affect that?
Ralph: Well, the peas and corn are kind of going out if we can't spray with the airplane. Because it doesn't make sense to drive in fields where the crops are big already and run it down.
Kevin: The problem is-- like this last summer we had problems with the sweet corn, a lot of it blew over sideways-- and you can't get down the rows. So we lose an option.
Q: Are the other farmers in the area that are close to the wind turbines are they concerned about not being able to spray their ground?
Ralph: A couple of them. One of them that hosted turbines right here to the south of us asked the company if they would shut the turbines down when the crop duster goes through.
Q: What'd they say?
Ralph: They said no.
Q: What's your experience been, either with the local officials or the company. Do you feel like they came in here and they wanted to work with people or did they just come in here and disregard what people thought?
Ralph: They seem to come in and--- they put up a front like they are really trying to do something for you. But in the long run, they're going to stick you in the back it seems. And they want to turn neighbor against neighbor. So that you can fight amongst [yourselves] and then they can come out and sit back and be the winners.
Q: Let me ask you a couple of questions about the quality of life. You mentioned you talked to your neighbors. Can you comment at all about the noise or the sound or what it sounds like or what other people have thought about that?
Kevin: When the winds over 12 miles an hour it sort of sounds like a jet engine. It's a deeper tone, you know, a deep roar.
Q: Does it keep you awake at night, does it wake you up? Does it affect people's sleep patterns?
Ralph: You can hear it when you're outside. But now it's winter and we don't have our windows open. So that's going to make a difference. When you're outside you can hear it constantly.
Q: What are the setbacks like around here from a home. This [turbine] here you mentioned is 1000 -1500 feet away?
Kevin: I think that's the minimum. [1000 feet]
Ralph: That's the minimum
Q: Do you feel that's adequate? That they should be set father away?
Ralph: I think they should be set farther away from the home. At least 1500 feet. At least.
Q: And do you know, are there any benefits to the local community? The landowners here are getting paid, and the community is getting paid-- is it creating any jobs? We're asking people questions on jobs because at the state level, they're saying these kinds of developments are going to create jobs. Can you comment on that at all? Are they going to create any jobs for the local economy.
Kevin: They said they were going to hire a couple of people to service them.
Q: Local people?
Kevin: I don't know. It would have to be specialized I guess. You would have to have some kind of training.
Ralph: They do hire some local contractors who come in and do the gravel work.
Q: So construction jobs.
Kevin: In the construction phase there's lots of jobs. There were at least two hundred people worked on it or better.
Ralph. But it's short term. Once it's constructed now, [it's over]. We would like to see it be more local. Because we have quarries right here. But they bypass them and they go to the big operators. The big construction outfits that they can get it cheaper with, you know?
Q: Can you tell us a little bit about the access roads [to the turbines], how they're put in and what they look like and what they've done to the farm fields?
Kevin: They put 90 feet of culvert in, and put (breaker rock?) down and top over road gravel.
Q: And how much land area does that take up when they go in there? How many acres of land do these access drives take out of a typical farm field?
Ralph: I would say it's pretty close to five acres per turbine.
Kevin: It depends on how far back in the field they go.
Ralph: And how many roads they go through the field with.
Q: Is that disrupting the farming activity for the local farmers here having their fields divided up?
Kevin: I would say yeah. I mean the general trend in farming is bigger and bigger, wider equipment, so you're going have to be inefficient I guess when you're farming smaller fields. Especially with GPS, we just adopted that last year, so you're going have to go around stuff instead of in straight lines.
Q: As far as the contracts-- you were offered to sign a contract. What was your thought about the context of the contract?
Ralph: Very one-one sided. They're in control of everything.
Q: So if you own a piece of property as a landowner and the developer comes in and you sign an agreement with them, do you have any control over where they're going to put these access drives in or where they are going to place the turbines, or do you have any say-so?
Ralph: There it would depend on the company, I think. Because each company has different contracts. There are some companies that are a lot better at understanding, and work with the people. But the one we happen to have in this area I don't think is very nice at all.
Kevin: Just a couple of farmers that we know they said they weren't happy with where they put the stuff. They said there's no leeway in where they can put it. So they either had to go along with it or that was the end of it.
Q: You were offered to sign a contract but you chose not to. How did that impact you and the community. Did it make any of your neighbors unhappy with you because of that?
Ralph: Many of the neighbors were unhappy. They sent us threatening letters.
Q: Threatening letters?
Ralph: Saying we owe them so much money because we're keeping them from getting money from these wind towers. Because we had an airstrip here, and originally, the Dodge County Board said that they should stay away 9,200-some feet, what the FAA said they should from an airstrip. Because we've been here 36 years with an airstrip. But evidently it didn't mean much because they just appointed other people to override them.
Q: Now these letters that were written to you by your neighbors, were they hand-written letters from the people themselves? Or were these letters coming from the company?
Ralph: They were typed-up from the company. The PR person. Form letters from a PR firm. [names firm] from Chicago, Illinois.
Q: Were they connected to the developer?
Kevin: Yeah. The developer, he's on the Carbon Climate Exchange. I don't know if you know about that. They're the ones trading carbon credits? He's onto that. And this PR firm worked for Al Gore. And too, himself, so there's kind of a tie.
Q: Do you know anything about property values, have you heard anything in the local community, are people concerned about property values being not maintained-- a drop in property values?
Ralph: I think the property values where the turbines are is going to drop. Because you have less work-land, number one, and any houses that were built up around them-- people don't want them in their back yard no more now, and so if they want to sell their houses, they ain't going to get as much money for it.
Q: Can you talk about some of the effects it's had on the community, you mentioned that neighbors are pitted against neighbors. Can you expand on that and tell us a little bit more about some of the effects on the local community because of the development?
Kevin: I'd say there's more hostility.
Q: More hostility?
Kevin: Yeah. In general, yeah. Money changes people.
Ralph: Our neighbor across the road had their house for sale and they had three different buyers on it. And every one that found out a wind turbine was going up in the back yard they backed right out of the deal.
Q: Has the house sold yet?
Ralph: No. They took it off the market now. They couldn't get it sold.
Q: Can't get it sold because of the development.
You mentioned the shadow flicker earlier, about the sun and the blades, can you talk about that a little bit, as far as what's that like here?
Kevin: If it lines up it will go over your whole yard, you know. It will come off your buildings.
Q: Does that happen every day? At a certain time?
Ralph: Just if it's clear out and the wind turbine is turned right.
Kevin: I guess if I was hosting a wind turbine I wouldn't put it east or west of my house.
Q: I had someone else mention that, because of the sun rising and the sun setting.
Kevin. Right.
Q: What was the interaction with the local officials like at the township board, or commissions who were appointed to approve this. Did you have a good feeling about working with them? Or did you not? Could you comment on that?
Ralph: They seemed to be sold out to the wind energy company already. Everything was just for the wind energy-- they wined and dined a lot of them ahead of time. And they're very positive about it. They don't want to listen to people. They think a lot of the complaints and stuff have no merit.
Q: You say you flew up to Minnesota to look at the project up there. Can you comment on that, as far as what your thoughts were when you took that visit up there.
Kevin: There's quite a few of them. And people up there seemed to be positive toward them, I guess.
Q: Is there much development, are they located around homes or around farms, or buildings, do you know?
Kevin: There's not-- it's not as populated as here. It's pretty sparse. More open.
Q: Was it a similar developer that was up there?
Kevin: There's quite a few of them. It's all different. Some of it is actually owned by farmers. On their own. There's actually a wind turbine manufacturer that moved in the pipes, I believe. The built the propeller blades there. So it's actually benefiting the community there.
Q: So your decision not to participate [in hosting a turbine] was an individual decision. Do you think if they were to do it differently in this area with a different development you would still participate in it?
Ralph: Probably not.
Kevin: No.
Ralph: I think someday if you could have a small one to generate your own current to the house, maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing. If they could prove it's efficient enough. But I don't think they can prove it yet. That it's going to be efficient enough to generate enough for a home.
Kevin: We own 450 acres. We took most of the fence lines out ourselves, you know? By hand. Moving all the rocks. So, we didn't really want nobody putting a road through the middle of it.
Q: Do you have any thought in general about the efficiency of wind-power?
Ralph: I think they shoot a lot of figures at you showing they produce more electricity than they really do. And in this area here, Wisconsin, only got wind enough for--what-- 21% of the time?
Kevin: I think 24%. or 30. They always give the figure that it produces so much-- like 63,000 homes this is supposed to provide power for.
Q: That's at 100%
Kevin: But they never tell you it takes a 25 mile per hour wind to make that. So the power curve is pretty sharp on a wind turbine. When the wind drops off it goes down dramatically. So, on average they're not going to produce very much power.
Ralph: It takes a little over 8 miles an hour just to start producing electricity. So the turbine can be turning out there, and not doing nothing. And up at Calumet, up here, what was that guys name up there?"
Kevin: Dean [Last name}
Ralph: He said that they brought that up at the meetings. They wanted them to shut the turbines down if they ain't producing electricity, and he said these people just jumped right off of their chairs. Because they want to keep these people that are seeing these turbines turning believing that they're making electricity all of the time.
Kevin: The average person sees them turning and they hear that figure that it's going to produce power for 66,000 homes-- and they're thinking, "Well, this is great."
Q: So you've attended a lot of meetings and have been quite involved with this process right from the start, then.
Kevin: I think we were the first people that they called. Because of the airstrip.
Q: You feel, you mean that the knowledge you've attained has put you in a position where you know what you need to know about it?
Kevin: Yeah.
Ralph: There's always more to learn, too. There's always more to learn about it.
Kevin: I mean, we're open minded. Like you said, we have the test tower, and we gave them a fair shake,
Q: How do you feel about the development here, now that it's here. How's it make you feel to see this here?
Ralph: It's a mess. It's a mess now. I don't know if they are going to get it straightened out in time for these farmers here, they want to put their crops in in the spring.
Kevin: It changes the view, I guess. That's what people always tell me, because, you know, we live here, so I don't really get to see it from far away distance, but they say, "We can see it from Beaver Dam"-- or Fond du Lac, or Lake Winnebago.
Ralph: From Oshkosh they can see this down here, you know? They can see it from Oshkosh.
Q: The state-- or I guess it was the Public Service Commission, that would be the agency. But they don't give much credence to what people think about aesthetics-- how things look. Any comments on that?
Kevin: I guess they really don't care if a couple people don't like the way it looks.
Q: Is there more than a couple people that don't like the way it looks?
Ralph: Oh, I would say if it would come down to a referendum, vote from all the people, I think it would be kind of marginal if it would go through. But it didn't come down to that. And it should have, I think. I think the whole township should vote on it.
I think that would be a good thing. To get all the people to vote on it one way or another. It's just a couple of people that are on the town board. And you should bring that out and make them aware of all of the problems-- and the good things-- if there's good things about it, I mean, bring them all out. It should be the people that make the decision. Not just a couple of them.
Kevin: There was a couple of people that spoke up you know, and thats fine if they want to build them, but the town and the county should actually benefit from it, you know. Instead of losing all this money that's going away from the town and county. Because it does effect-- like you said-- all the people can see it and it affects you I guess.
3/13/09 Letter from residents reporting trouble in PSC approved wind farms in Wisconsin
Home in PSC approved wind farm, Fond du Lac County, 2008. Photo by Town of Union study committee member, Jim Bembinster
Letters from residents reporting trouble in PSC approved Wisconsin Wind Farms
Printed in the Tri-County News
12 March 2009
"First, wind farms are not agricultural, they are industrial. They should be zoned and taxed as such. They do not belong in or near a residential area.
I am troubled by what I have read in the document “Report Number 061608-1 Post Construction Noise Survey” prepared by engineers hired by a power company to justify themselves. The report indicates that the calculated values of noise reflect “the increase to the ambient levels.” I would be more interested in receiving the actual noise and energy levels at various wind speeds.
Page four also reports that no “whoosh-whoosh” sound was heard. The reporter must have been deaf or has had the good luck of being present at a rare quiet run-time, or was way up-wind. These noises are loud enough to be heard inside at times. The report has lost most of its credibility as far as I am concerned.
I am beginning to doubt everything the report states. I am starting to think the engineers were hired to give the power company the information they wanted to hear. And that only selective tests from selected sites were used to generate the report. Some people say they saw equipment at spots not indicated in the report. Much of the report, appendix C, contains mostly useless information because of the lack of wind speed and sound level information.
Most of the residences in our area are skeptical of what the power company now reports primarily because of what they have said and have not said in the past. They promoted the project by reporting the “polished good” and the “least” favorable information was neglected. They waved money in front of landowners. These landowners are now having some regrets about the project due to the adverse effects it is having on their lives.
An indication of the double standard used by the companies is that the internal service manuals used by the power companies recommends that employees stay at least 1,300 feet away from an active tower, yet they build towers 1,000 feet from a residence.
Another concern is that Flight for Life helicopters will not respond to areas within a wind farm. Injured individuals will have to be transported to designated landing zones.
I am also concerned about my health. The sound/feeling leaves me irritated and restless at times. My sleep has been affected. I wonder what the long-term effects are of low frequency noise and wind turbine syndrome.
With what I have said, I wonder what good this project is. Are the power companies making a lot of money? These things would never have been built if large government subsidies were not given to the power companies. At $3 million to $4 million a tower, they are a terrible investment.
I see nothing good for me personally. They have spoiled what I have tried to create in the past 35 years in restoring a pre-Civil War homestead to be my Shangri-la."
Larry and Carol Lamont
Town of Marshfield
12 March 2009
From other Wisconsin wind farm residents:
13 March 2009
"Previous letters have attempted to inform local citizens of the hazards of inappropriate placement of industrial wind turbines.
Information received from those living in the industrial wind facilities in Fond du Lac County support world-wide research regarding the negative impact on health including sleep deprivation, headaches, nausea, dizziness, exhaustion, depression, increased seizure activity to sensitive persons, vertigo, internal pressure on body systems, anger, irritability and depression due to the noise, shadow flicker and vibration caused by the operation of these huge metal and fiberglass dinosaurs invading our landscape.
One lady from the area stated her father can not come to visit because the shadow flickers caused him to have a seizure. Flight for Life indicates they will not land in industrial wind facilities. “Due to the safety considerations, Flight for Life will not land in these clusters because of the risks posed to air medical transport, and wind farms present additional hazards to Air Medical transport systems” as stated in a memo from Flight for Life.
Not only do those living in these industrial wind facilities experience health problems, they fear for their safety. One woman meeting with the Fond du Lac County Town of Marshfield Board on March 2 tearfully state those living in the area have been “given a life sentence” because at her age she cannot leave her home and the turbine facility will be around longer than she will. Others indicate that homes listed for sale have had no activity from potential buyers. One person indicated that prior to the installation they had an interested party who backed out of the purchase when it was disclosed that the turbines were going up. Loss of property values is a real threat.
Another citizen related that as he walked in his woods, he was peppered with pellets of ice that were being thrown off the blades. Local citizens have experienced ice throws, with one reporting that a chunk hit her car. Others are collecting and saving the chunks in their freezers. With the speed at the tips of the blades reaching upwards of 140 or more miles per hour even a small shard of ice can become a deadly weapon.
Other causes of great frustration reported by members of the community include loss of television, radio and broad band reception. Others report that the shadow flicker is bouncing off of other objects including metal siding, ponds and water, glass and even toasters and refrigerators greatly amplifying the effect.
Attempts by WE Energies to mitigate these problems has been met with less than adequate responses and have been falling on deaf ears. The issues cannot be resolved. People are being told they are only entitled to one working TV and radio in their homes. Even with the best satellite dishes on the market, reception is inadequate and stations that do come in are not the stations homeowners received prior to the installation. Those having to put up satellite are also told that they will only receive two years maximum payment for their loss of reception when previously they did not have to pay for any TV or radio reception.
Many report that windows, shades and curtains have to be kept closed to avoid the flicker. This necessitates the use of air conditioning when previously none was needed because windows could be opened. How is this saving energy? Who is paying for the increased energy use? What about the ability to look out your window and enjoy the view?
If you think you could live like this, there are a lot of houses for sale. If you think you or others should not have to live like this, please contact your senators and representatives to voice your disapproval of the current setbacks. Very shortly Senator Jeff Plale (Dem.), 7th Senate District (Oak Creek, St. Francis, Cudahy, Milwaukee), will be introducing a bill that threatens to take local control out of the decision making process for siting industrial wind facilities and place it in the hands of the Public Service Commission. You can reach his office to voice your opposition to this action by calling (608) 266-7505 or 1-800-361-5487.
Respectfully,
Diane Hoerth and Teresa Hahn
13 March 2009
RED ALERT WISCONSIN!
A draft of a bill that would allow the Public Service Commission to repeat the wind turbine siting disasters in Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties has been introduced by Senator Jeff Plale, (D- South Milwaukee)
It should be noted that Senator Plale will have no wind turbines in his district, and no constituents who will be affected by this bill. The main impact will be on residents of rural Wisconsin.
Though the bill mentions no specifics about setbacks, noise limits, and other siting concerns, it is very clear about giving turbine siting approval to the PSC.
The PSC approved the siting of turbines 1000 feet from non-participating residents homes, and a noise limit of 50 decibels. Residents in the PSC approved wind farms of Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties are now having a hard time living with the disastrous results.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD A DRAFT OF SENATOR PLALE'S BILL
After you read it, please call your legislators (click here to find out who they are and how to contact them) and let them know if they want wind turbine siting reform, it should be based it on the Town of Union's Large Wind Ordinance, not a "recycled ordinance guidelines provided by an out-of-state utility"
3/12/09: Senator Plale's Goliath Turbine Siting Reform Bill, and a word from David.
Senator Plale's Goliath-Sized Turbine Siting Reform Bill, and a word from a Town-Sized David:
A Home in a PSC approved Fond du Lac County wind farm, Near the town of Byron, 2009
RED ALERT WISCONSIN!
A draft of a bill that would allow the Public Service Commission to repeat the wind turbine siting disasters in Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties is being introduced by Senator Jeff Plale, (D- South Milwaukee)
It should be noted that Senator Plale will have no wind turbines in his district, and no constituents who will be affected by this bill. The main impact will be on residents of rural Wisconsin.
Though the bill mentions no specifics about setbacks, noise limits, and other siting concerns, it is very clear about giving turbine siting approval to the PSC.
The PSC approved the siting of turbines 1000 feet from non-participating residents homes, and a noise limit of 50 decibels. Residents in the PSC approved wind farms of Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties are now having a hard time living with the disastrous results.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD A DRAFT OF SENATOR PLALE'S BILL
Home in PSC approved wind farm near the Town of Byron, Fond du Lac County, Winter, 2009
When a senator introduces a bill intended to strip away the power of elected officials of our towns, villages, and counties, in order to hand this power to appointed members of the Public Service Commission, we say it's time to contact our legislators.
Below is a letter from Douglas Zweizig, Acting Chair of the Town of Union's Plan and Zoning commission about this issue. Dr. Zweizig is also Professor Emeritus, School of Library and Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Though this letter is addressed to Senator Erpenbach, the content holds true for all of us in the state.
After you read it, please call your legislators (click here to find out who they are and how to contact them) and let them know if they want wind turbine siting reform, it should be based it on the Town of Union's Large Wind Ordinance, not "recycled ordinance guidelines provided by an out-of-state utility"
(Click here to download the Union Ordinance)
(Click here to download the Wisconsin draft Model ordinance, which has since been pulled from the PSC website)
Dear Senator Erpenbach,
Sometimes a David just does a better job than a Goliath.
In 2007, landowners in the Town of Union (population just over 2,000) were approached by EcoEnergy (a wind turbine vendor) about placing large wind turbines on their properties.
In August 2007, the Town of Union Board enacted a temporary stay on wind turbine development in order to allow time to write a local ordinance for their governance.
Over the past 18 months, I have been the acting chair of the Town of Union Plan Commission as it developed its recently adopted Ordinance No. 2008-06, Wind Energy Systems Licensing Ordinance.
When our volunteer citizen Wind Turbines Study Committee began its work to prepare a draft ordinance, they naturally turned to Wisconsin’s Public Service Commission and its Draft Model Wind Ordinance for Wisconsin.
However, it turned out that the Draft Model Wind Ordinance for Wisconsinwas a poor guide for the creation of a responsible ordinance.
The hundreds of pages of literature that the Committee had reviewed included cautions about the effects of wind turbines on human health.
Where the PSC’s Draft Model Wind Ordinance for Wisconsin uses setbacks of 1,000 feet from dwellings, the Committee found 16 studies and reports from governments, physicians, and professional societies that stipulate setbacks of 1⁄2 mile or more in order to protect human health (10 of those sources set setbacks at 1 mile or more).
The Committee sought to learn the basis for the PSC recommendation and required a Freedom of Information request to learn that there was no rationale for the 1,000 foot setback—that the distance had been provided by a Florida utility!
While the PSC recycled ordinance guidelines provided by an out-of-state utility, our citizen Committee collected and evaluated hundreds of studies and reports and produced a report for our Town’s Plan Commission together with a draft ordinance. (The report and the minutes from the Committee’s 14 open meetings are available in the Evansville public library.)[Click to download final report] [Click to download minutes]
The Plan Commission worked with this draft ordinance and its supporting materials for eight months, holding its own hearings and working through the ordinance line-by-line. The resulting ordinance has been cited and requested across the country.
The PSC’s Draft Model Wind Ordinance for Wisconsin is no longer available on the Wisconsin PSC website.
I am writing you, as my Senator, because some are advocating that local governments should not be permitted to enact local guidelines for the placement of wind turbines and that the state should make these determinations.
I think that an examination of the working of the Public Service Commission and of our Town’s Plan Commission would show that our process and its result are demonstrably superior to that of the PSC in this case.
Until there is a reform of the operation of the Public Service Commission, I do not think that we should entrust the welfare of Wisconsin residents to their neglectful care.
Clearly, it would be preferable for a State agency, with its resources and expertise, to develop guidelines for the placement of large wind turbines that take into account the
health of Wisconsin residents.
Our small Town was required to spend considerable time and resources to do the kind of work that should have been done by the State, but, since the PSC has neglected that responsibility, the process the Town of Union pursued appears to have developed a superior product.
I do not believe that the Public Service Commission should be entrusted with this responsibility unless it is audited, reformed, and supervised.
Our process led us to focus on the central issue from the perspective of Wisconsin residents.
The substance of our ordinance, I believe, addresses the duty of government to protect its citizens—in this case, to protect the health and safety of residents of the State from the negative effects of a large wind turbine system being installed too closely on a neighboring property.
The research and the case studies reviewed by our Committee showed that large wind turbines located within a half-mile of a residence have a high probability of producing sound that wouldbe injurious to those dwelling in the residence.
Our recommended ordinance does not unduly limit what a person may do on their own property, only addressing the impacts on neighboring residents. The residents in need of protection are those on neighboring properties who may be affected by the noise or hazard that come with the installation of a large wind turbine.
These residences are provided protection by the required half-mile setback and by required
sound studies to ensure that sound levels will not beharmful. However, provision is made in the ordinance for neighboring residents to enter into an agreement to reduce the distance of a large wind turbine from their residence should they choose to do so.
I must admit that when I first began to inform myself about this issue, I was skeptical of the seemingly hysterical reports of effects of sound from the turbines. After all, seen from a distance, they seem rather elegant, slow-moving providers of green energy.
However, as I have learned more and have visited properties surrounded by large wind turbines, I have come to understand that what looked like hysteria was more likely desperation expressed by citizens who were suffering serious effects, had been failed by their government, and were either going to have to move (if possible) or suffer these effects for the next thirty years.
I am strongly in favor of alternative energy sources. My wife and I are installing a geothermal heating/cooling system on our rural property and are investigating investment in photovoltaic and wind energy systems.
We support and contribute to such Wisconsin organizations as Clean Wisconsin, the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters, the Midwest Renewable Energy Association, and the Natural Resources Foundation of Wisconsin, as well as related national organizations.
We are concerned that environmental organizations, in their zeal to reduce our dependence on carbon-based fuels, would overlook the damaging effects of locating large wind turbines
too close to populations.
Finally, I think that there has been too little attention paid to the personal property aspects of large wind energy systems. While I believe that the state should allow great latitude for what one does on his/her own property, I also believe that the state should regulate what effects a property owner can produce on neighboring properties.
In effect, the Wisconsin Public Service Commission has chosen to ignore these effects on
neighboring properties and has permitted large wind energy systems to commit a nuisance, “a nontrespassory invasion of another’s interest in the private use and
enjoyment of land.”
When Wisconsin residents’ sleep is interrupted by the operation of wind turbines and when they have to leave their property to avoid the effects of shadow flicker, then it would seem that the characteristics of a nuisance are manifested.
I, and others from the Town of Union, would be glad to meet with you or other members of the Committee on Commerce, Utilities, Energy, and Rail at your convenience to expand on or provide evidence for these observations.
I would also ask to be notified of any public legislative hearings to be held on the proposed legislation.
Best regards, Doug Zweizig
March 11, 2009
Evansville, Wisconsin
NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: Click on the image below to watch a video recorded from the porch of a home in Fond du Lac County. The turbine in this video is less than 1600 feet the house. The PSC approved the siting of turbines 1000 feet from homes in this wind farm. (Contact us by clicking here if you'd like us to send you a copy of this video on DVD)
3/7/08 Industrial Wind Turbine Health and Safety Siting Basics: A to Z
This week, Wisconsin State Senator, Jeff Plale, (D-South Milwaukee) will introduce a bill which could hand over all siting of wind turbines to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin.
The PSC approved the siting of industrial wind turbines just 1000 feet from homes in the wind farms of Fond du Lac County. Residents in those wind farms are now being forced to live with the disastrous result.
They are not alone. People all over the country are reporting the same problems. For a look at what life could be like for those of us unlucky enough to have our homes in a wind developer target area-- to see what the future could be for rural residents if Plale's bill passes, click on the link below to read a recent article called
Loud as the wind; Wind tower neighbors complain of noise fallout
While we wait for Senator Plale to introduce the bill that could bring the same kind of misery to the entire state, let's review our A to Z series.
If you're new to this issue, this series will give you good basic information about industrial windfarms and why communities need strong ordinances.
This A to Z guide is based upon the Town of Union's Large Wind ordinance which was unanimously adopted in November 2008.
The town of Union is located in Rock County, Wisconsin.
Thoroughly researched, and based in scientific and medical data, it's a product of 22 months of hard work by both citizens and elected officials, and over $40,000 in legal fees.
This solid, defensible ordinance is considered by many to be the best in the state. It's also an unusually readable ordinance, with all of the Study Committee findings right up front.
Click here to download the town of Union's entire 48 page ordinance.
A is for Assume: Click here if you'd like to know....
Where did the siting guidelines used by the State of Wisconsin come from?
What is the 1000 foot setback and the 50 decibel noise limit based on?
If wind turbine manufacturers require workers and operators to stay at least 1300 feet away from a spinning turbine, why does the state allow a 1000 foot setback?
If the World Health Organizations says that night time noise levels should be 35 decibels or less to allow for restful sleep, why does the state allow a noise limit of 50 decibels?
B is for Basics: Click here if you'd like to know......
How big are industrial scale turbines?
Why do we need a minimum setback of 2640 feet from our homes?
What is Shadow Flicker?
What is Ice Throw?
Who do you complain to about noise and other problems once the turbines are up?
C is for Construction: Click here if you'd like to know...
-about inevitable road damage during the construction phase, and what your township needs to do to insure that the developer will restore your roads to pre-construction condition. Includes Photo Essay: heavy equipment involved in transport and construction of industrial wind turbines.
D is for Dear Legislator: Click here if you'd like to know.....
How to contact your senator and assembly person and find out how much they really know about this issue, and where they stand on turbine siting reform, and to let them know we need renewable energy plan that will not endanger our most important non-renewables: our health, our families, our homes and our land. Setbacks and noise limits are the issue here. 400 foot tall turbines sited 1000 feet from our homes is just too close.
E is for Explain: Click here if you'd like to know...
What the Public Service Commission tells us -- or more accurately doesn't tell us- about the basis for the state's 1000 foot setback, the 50 decibel noise limit-- and and other non-responses to questions in the open records request from the Town of Union. Out of 18 questions, why will the PSC answer only six?
F is for Flicker: Click here if you'd like to know...
What is wind turbine shadow flicker? What does it look like? Why is it a problem? Why do developers say it will not cause problems? Why are people who are now trying to live with it in Fond du Lac County going nuts?
G is for Ground Current: Click here if you'd like to know.....
What is ground current? What is stray voltage? Why does it matter to farmers? Though the issue of stray voltage is a contentious one, there is no getting around the fact industrial wind plants require hundreds of miles worth of electrical cable be trenched into the ground. This post has pictures of the trenching and the high voltage cables being laid into the ground without conduit. It also features an interview with a farmer whose cows and milk production began to suffer once the turbines went on line.
H is for Help! Click here if you'd like to know....
Why did Flight for Life tell the people of Fond du Lac County they couldn't land inside of the wind farm? One of the things you are forced to give up when a wind farm is sited in your community is Flight for Life emergency air transport: Read why emergency medical helicopters are no longer an option for those living inside of wind farms.
I is for Ice Throw: Click here if you'd like to know...
Turbine ice throw: What it is, why it's a problem, and why wind developers continue to insist it's can't happen. Except it has: video, news reports, pictures.
J is for Jursidiction: Click here if you'd like to know....
Why, in spite of what wind developers and lobbyists tell residents and members of town and county government, the state of Wisconsin does indeed allow towns and counties to restrict and regulate wind energy systems—(commonly known as wind farms) for reasons of human health and safety. The state also allows towns and counties to declare a moratorium on all aspects of wind energy systems construction in order to give the township or county time to work on creating a wind ordinance. This post charts the Town of Union's step by step legal process in the creation and adoption of their ordinance.
K is for Kamperman & James: Click here if you'd like to know....
About a siting guide for industrial wind turbines with a focus on reducing health effects due to turbine noise. Created by community noise experts, George W. Kamperman and Richard R. James, these findings were used by the Town of Union when creating their ordinance.
L is for Letters to Lepinski: Click here if you'd like to know.....
About Fond du Lac County residents who are experiencing trouble with turbine related noise, shadow flicker and other negative effects of living too close to turbines in the PSC approved wind farm they are forced to live in, and the letters sent to Public Service Commissioner Jim Lepinski.
The bitter tone of these letters reflects the general feeling of many residents in Dodge and Fond du Lac Counties who are now living with the results of the PSC's decision.
M is for Members of the Committee: Click here if you'd like to know
Who are the people that worked on the town of Union Study Wind Ordinance study committee, and why did they volunteer their time?
When a wind developer approaches your town board with the news that they plan on siting an industrial wind farm in your community, your local elected officials have two choices:
They can do nothing at all and allow the development to go forward with the wind developers setting the terms-or they can create an ordinance which protects the health, safety and welfare of residents and also protects the township roads from the inevitable damage that will occur during the turbine construction phase.
N is for Noise: Click here if you'd like to know
What it's like to live inside an industrial wind farm day by day: The Meyer family in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, began keeping a noise log the day the turbines near their home went on line on March 3rd of 2008. This noise log gives us an idea of the trouble improperly sited turbines can bring to a family home.
O is for Operator's Manual: Click here if you'd like to know ...
Manufacturer Vesta's workers and operators manual safety recommendations, which clearly sets 1300 feet as minimum safety setback for operators and workers on 1.5 MW turbines. And these are the people with hard hats on. Given this, why does the state of Wisconsin ask residents to live even closer?
What it's like for a township to be strong-armed by wind developers who say the state is on their side: excerpts from a transcribed audio recording of the March 8, 2007, Town of Magnolia Planning and Zoning Commission meeting in Rock County, Wisconsin. Instead of speaking to the commissioners and members of the community directly, the wind developer has decided to have a lawyer do the talking for them.
Why you have to agree to a gag order, 24/7 access to your home, and giving your social security number to a wind developer before they will agree restore your reception after turbines go on line: a look at the contract people in Fond du Lac County have to sign just to get their TV reception back.
R is for Research, References and Readability: Part One: Click here if you'd like to know....
More about wind turbine noise, why it's a problem and what kind trouble a corn and soybean farmer began to suffer once the turbines near his farm went on line.
(Click here to see an interactive map of many of the proposed wind farm sites in Wisconsin)
R is for Research, References and Readability: Part Two : Click here if you'd like to know:
About the findings and the recitals in the Town of Union ordinanance, and the documents they are based on.
“Findings” are the results of an investigation, study or inquiry such as the one undertaken by the Town of Union study committee.
"Recitals" are an account of the steps the town of Union took in order to create its large ordinance.
S is for Sound: Click here if you'd like to know....
What is the difference between sound and noise? And when it comes to wind turbines, why does it matter?
S is also for Safety: Click here if you'd like to know....
What the medical community is now saying about the impact of industrial wind turbines on human health.
(Click here to watch a news segment about this issue)
S is for Setbacks: Click here if you'd like to know....
Why 1000 feet from your door is just too close. From the Town of Union Large Wind Ordinance:
"The closer people live to wind turbines, the more likely they will experience noise annoyance or develop adverse health effects from wind turbine noise"
T is for Turbine: Click here if you'd like to know...
About the anatomy of a 400 foot industrial wind turbine, below ground level: how deep does the foundation go? How much concrete and rebar is used? How much electrical cable? How much compaction and other damage happens to a farmer's field?
Why families in Iowa farm were asked to evacuate their homes when a turbine began spinning out of control.
What wind turbine construction looks like: A photo essay from bottom to top of an 40 story industrial-scale machine.
U is for Unsafe: Click here if you'd like to know...
How the State of Wisconsin failed to protect the people of the Town of Byron and others living inside of the PSC approved wind farms of Fond du Lac County.
V is for Vibroacoustic Disease: Click here if you'd like to know....
What is Vibroacoustic Disease (VAD), what does it have to do with the siting of industrial wind turbines and why isn't the state of Wisconsin paying attention?
W is for Wildlife: Click here if you'd like to know...
About the turbine bat kills near the Horicon marsh, what we now know about what is killing them, and a candid look at a "green job": how post-construction bat and bird mortality studies are being conducted along in Fond du Lac County's Forward Energy wind farm.
X is for FIX What's Broken: Click here if you'd like to know....
Why are these Johnsberg and Malone wind farm residents asking for help, and why do they feel no one is listening?
The wind developers and the PSC assured the people of Johnsburg and Marshfield that the turbines sited 1000 feet from their homes would not be loud enough to bother them or keep them up at night, that shadow flicker would not be a problem, that they would suffer no negative health effects, that there would be no impact on wildlife or property values for that matter.
Over a year later it's clear to residents of yet another PSC- approved Fond du Lac County wind farm that none of this is true.
Y is for Year and a Day: Click here if you want to know:
About a day by day account of what life has been like for a Wisconsin family living inside of a PSC approved wind farm for over a year.
Z is for Zero Regard for Residents Concerns: Click here if you want to know...
What the future will be like for Wisconsin if wind farm siting reform bill passes. Hang on to your hats.
Most of the documents used to create this ordinance are in the Town of Union's Final Report which you can download by clicking here.
(To read other ordinances from around the state, click here.)
(For a closer look on how the Union ordinace came to be, click here)