9/13/10 Same story, different location: Wisconsin or otherwise: Wind turbines too close to homes equals no sleep

WIND FARMS FROM FAR AWAY: The view from an orbiting satellite

WIND FARMS FROM CLOSE UP: The view from someone living with them:

“I’m getting vibrations, and I haven’t slept in I don’t know how long,” Mrs. Garrow said. “But I don’t think anybody’s looking out for our interest.”

TURBINE NOISE CONCERNS RAISED

SOURCE: pressrepublican.com

September 13, 2010

By Michelle Besaw

Vibrations disturbing, some Town of Clinton residents say.

CLINTON — Noise was the big issue during the Wind Facilities Planning Board’s recent public hearing, and it wasn’t the noise coming from the 40-plus people packed into the Town Hall.

The meeting, which was set to address local concerns with variance requests from Horizon’s Marble River wind farm project, focused on noise issues surrounding Noble’s wind farms and the fear that this project will only bring the same problems.

Chad and Rose Garrow shared a complaint that the noise study done on the current turbines was unfair due to reported battery malfunctions.

“I’m getting vibrations, and I haven’t slept in I don’t know how long,” Mrs. Garrow said. “But I don’t think anybody’s looking out for our interest.”

Richard Green of Churubusco said he can feel the sounds from the turbines, citing the low range and the repetitiveness.

“It’s a constant noise that you can feel in your body.”

But Burlington, Vt., resident Martin Lavin, who owns 1,350 acres in Clinton, said he deals with noise from passing cars and loud college students at his home.

In Horizon’s original project proposal, Lavin was to have eight turbines on his property, but “we lost them all” in the scaled-back proposal, which calls for taller, yet fewer turbines.

“But I’m still in support of the project,” he said.

Jennifer Ruggles of Churubusco argued that Lavin’s example of noise was a result of his choices.

“You chose to buy a house in a city. We chose to buy a house in the country. We did not choose to move next to these things. I have 35 acres, and I can still feel (the noise). This noise came to us.”

Green said that of the landowners with turbine contracts, 49 are not town residents and just 24 are.

“The income isn’t going to town residents. They don’t have to live with the windmills.”

The town’s wind lawyer, Daniel Spitzer, suggested that the Wind Board summon a Noble representative and call a special public meeting to respond to residents’ noise complaints and address the enforcement of the noise laws.

Horizon’s variances request that it build turbines exceeding 400 feet, increasing their height to 492 feet, which raises concerns with Customs and Border Protection Supervisor Richard Bowman.

“I’ve flown around the ones that are 400 feet, and those are pretty up there,” he said, adding that the turbines’ proximity to the border is also of concern.

“We fly as low as the tress, depending on what we have to work on.”

Ruggles shared Bowman’s border concern.

“It is getting worse at our border, not better. We really should consider safety of the community before money.”

But Spitzer said the new proposal removes most of the turbines from the wetlands area, which are in the northeast area nearest to the border.

The proposal reduces the number of turbines to be built in the towns of Clinton and Ellenburg from 109 to 74.

In return, they’re replacing them with taller, more powerful turbines, generating 0.9 megawatts more than the originals, going from 2.1 to 3, which allows them to reduce the footprint of the project.

The total electrical output would remain the same as the original proposal.

Janice Padula of Plattsburgh owns land in the town but will not have turbines.

“But I am in very big support of this project,” she said.

Padula is a wind professor at Clinton Community College and supports wind energy, calling the turbines “majestic.”

“When I hung my very first load of laundry, I thought, wow, I’m going to put a turbine up here someday.

“I really know these people are reputable. Don’t throw out the project because of someone else,” she continued, referring to residents’ issues with Noble’s turbines.

“I really believe in the reputation of Horizon.”

Nancy Neubrand, a student of Padula’s, said renewable energy is necessary today.

“Wind is free. We need to get into renewables. We’re using substantial resources.”

Will Rogers of Clinton agreed.

“We need to go to renewable or be at the mercy of the Mideast.”

The Wind Facilities Planning Board will have a public meeting at 7 p.m. Monday, Sept. 20, at the Fire House, 1301 Clinton Mills Road.

They committee will review Horizon’s application for variances.

MORE FROM VINALHAVEN:

STATE MUST PROVIDE SOME RELIEF TO NEIGHBORS OF WIND TURBINES

Here, it is not just the constant noise, but the pulsing drone that makes the noise particularly hostile that is so disturbing. It is inescapable.

SOURCE: freepressonline

By Alan Farago

I am one of the neighbors of the Vinalhaven wind turbines, misled by turbine supporters in 2008 and 2009 that "ambient sounds would mask the noise of the turbines." As I write these words, the noise from the wind turbines churns in the background.

My home is 3,000 feet from the turbines, and my experience is contrary to all the assertions that were made during the permitting process a few years ago.

At this hour of the morning, it should be peaceful outside, the quiet interrupted only by the calling crows or osprey circling.

Some locals dismiss the noise complaints, saying that Vinalhaven had a diesel power plant for years. But to live near excessive noise is not the reason I chose to own property here.

Also, as I have become familiar with wind turbine noise, it is more and more clear that there is a fundamental difference between turbine noise and other forms of industrial disturbances.

Here, it is not just the constant noise, but the pulsing drone that makes the noise particularly hostile that is so disturbing. It is inescapable.

At a recent public hearing on Vinalhaven on turbine noise sponsored by the Island Institute, one neighbor - at the point of tears - said that she had been forced from her house when her chest began vibrating at the same syncopation as the turbines outside.

At that hearing I said I supported wind energy so long as the economic advantages to ratepayers were clear and so long as surrounding property values were not affected.

The jury is out on the first point, but not on the second. The constant noise from the turbines, even at 3,000 feet, has taken away a valuable part of my investment and a key part of my family's well-being.

I never imagined my first waking thought would be: where is the wind blowing and how much noise are the wind turbines making now? But that is what happens in this formerly quiet, beautiful place.

At the public meeting in Vinalhaven, I asked a question: when would the natural quiet be restored and when would my property values be protected? There was no answer from the project supporters. Silence.

Neighbors' complaints about turbine noise rose immediately after the three, 1.5 megawatt GE turbines were turned on, last fall.

A year after the Vinalhaven turbines were greeted with wide public acclaim, the turbine neighbors find themselves, through no fault of their own, in an extraordinarily difficult and expensive effort to demonstrate that the wind turbines do exceed state regulations.

The cost of wind turbines has been shifted onto neighbors who never imagined these kinds of burdens when the benefits of wind energy were sold to the public.

It is wrong and it is unfair to impose both the noise and the uncertainty of resolution - or if there will ever be resolution - on a few nearby homeowners.

These inequities are predictable. They will multiply wherever wind turbines are placed within a mile-and-a-half of residences, and under the State of Maine's archaic noise regulations.

The State of Maine must provide some relief to neighbors of wind turbines. To start, a fund should be established from a utility fee imposed state-wide that allows citizens to access highly technical and expensive noise and acoustic measurement equipment and data and independent experts.

The collateral damage of wind turbines is the assessment of the noise they make. No one in authority admits this, during the permitting process.

They say, "The noise will be minor," or "the sound of the wind blowing in the leaves will cover the sound." That is simply not true.

The Vinalhaven neighbors have already spent tens of thousands of dollars to engage the local utility on the matter of measuring the churning noise. The costs are not trivial, but once turbines are erected in your neighborhood, their noise will be affixed to nearby property.

Be forewarned.

Alan Farago, Vinalhaven

THIRD STORY

Consultant: Vinalhaven wind turbine noise exceeds limit

“Anybody with a set of ears can come sit on my porch. You can clearly tell the difference between wind in the trees and the sound of the turbines. They don’t cancel each other out.”

 SOURCE Bangor Daily News, www.bangordailynews.com

September 12, 2010

by Abigail Curtis

VINALHAVEN, Maine — The three wind turbines that were designed to lower and stabilize the unpredictable electric bills of Vinalhaven and North Haven islands also have brought some sleepless nights to those who live closest to their giant blades and the noises they make.

The controversy over the noise levels between Fox Islands Wind officials and some islanders began soon after the turbines went on line last fall, but last week, the Maine Department of Environmental Protection received a letter from its wind turbine noise consultant that seems to back up the project’s unhappy neighbors.

“There exists a significant body of consistent meteorological and sound data indicating sound levels greater than applicable limits,” Warren L. Brown, who also serves as the University of Maine’s radiation safety officer, wrote Wednesday in a detailed letter. “Substantial changes are recommended for FIW nighttime operations.”

Brown reached his conclusions after reviewing a noise complaint submitted by Fox Islands Wind Neighbors, a loose association of those who are negatively affected by the turbines, and also after reviewing sound and other data from the Fox Islands Wind project.

For Cheryl Lindgren, who lives less than half a mile from the turbines, Brown’s words came as welcome news, though the department has yet to make a decision based on them.

“It’s gratifying, it’s hopeful. It’s also been a lot of work having to do all this to get people to acknowledge that we have a problem,” she said Sunday in a telephone interview. “We’re hoping we can work together now to get some kind of compromise — that we can get some dialogue going, and that they will respond to the needs of the people who are suffering with this.”

But George Baker, the CEO of the Fox Island Wind electric company and vice president for wind at the Island Institute, said Brown’s findings might not be conclusive.

“He’s looked at a bunch of data that our sound consultant has put together. Our sound consultant analyzed exactly the same data and found us to be in compliance,” Baker said Sunday in a telephone interview. “There’s something going on here, and we don’t know exactly what it is, between the experts, and how they are analyzing and interpreting exactly the same data.”

According to Baker, the differences might stem from the way the experts treat ambient sound from various sources, especially the wind in the trees. State sound regulations “have a hard time” dealing with wind turbines, he said.

“If we were an industrial facility, you would turn on the facility on a still, calm day [and measure its noises],” he said. “Unfortunately, our little community wind farm doesn’t operate on still, calm days. It operates on windy days. … When the wind is blowing in the woods, it makes a lot of sound.”

Lindgren, however, says this argument is full of hot air.

“[Baker] keeps talking about the ambient sound. It’s a little disheartening,” she said. “Anybody with a set of ears can come sit on my porch. You can clearly tell the difference between wind in the trees and the sound of the turbines. They don’t cancel each other out.”

Baker said the turbines are turned down by 2 decibels at night in order to meet the state sound requirements.

“If, when experts get through sorting out this question of compliance, and it’s determined that we are out of compliance, we’ll just turn them down a little more at night,” he said. “We’re absolutely committed to compliance.”

But that solution might not sit well with some islanders, he suggested, who have benefited from a 15 to 20 percent reduction in their electricity costs since the turbines starting moving.

A survey completed a month ago by Fox Islands Electric Coop members showed that the majority of respondents were in favor of slowing down the turbines in order to reduce sound no more than state regulations require.

“The project remains very, very widely supported on the islands,” he said.

Lindgren, however, pointed out that electricity costs dipped nationwide last fall, not just on Vinalhaven and North Haven islands. And, after nearly a year of being woken up by the noisy turbines, she’s both frustrated and disappointed.

“We believed in ‘green energy’ as being all good. That’s not always true,” she said. “When corporations get involved, it’s not always from the heart. … I think the whole population could turn off a couple of light bulbs and we’d be in the same place.”

9/13/10 Spin Factory: more wind developers are turning to Public Relations firms AND Spinning green into gold in 2002 -the making of the renewable energy market: Was it wrong for them to use September 11th?

Note from the BPWI research nerd: With millions of dollars on the line, it's no surprise that wind developers are turning to Public Relations firms for help with public acceptance.

Below, some examples of the kind of services a PR firm can provide.

 Debunking Myths of Cleantech PR

SOURCE: Renewable Energy World

 by David Andrew Goldman

Excerpt:

[....] Cleantech start-ups often find themselves in a Chicken/Egg situation where they want to wait until they get a big break before publicizing, but miss the opportunity to use PR and the media to make that big break happen.

For the most part, this is because they don't realize that there are several ways to garner coverage by the trade and business press without having a hard news angle.

Manufactured News

Our firm uses a strategy of creating and placing op-ed articles for our clients.

Working with the executives of these cleantech startups to draft opinion articles is a great way to circumvent the no news blues.

A strong opinion piece will always garner attention and the exposure keeps our clients’ websites from looking like stale brochure-ware.

The placement of these articles in reputable media outlets provides third-party validation for a company’s customers and investors.

Tailored Pitches

Expansion Media recently landed a client the holy grail of publicity: the front page of the New York Times Sunday Business section. How did we do it? R&D.

While our clients are busy in laboratories, we are closely monitoring and researching the media that cover their respective niches.

We handpicked the journalist we wanted to write the story based on their previous coverage of the industry and crafted a pitch the catered to his unique worldview.

The result in this case was an article that was not only read by millions of people, but was also 100% positive toward our client.

That kind of coverage isn’t the result of luck, but stems from careful research and knowledge of our clients’ industry and the journalists who cover it.

Survey Says!

Most start-ups don’t realize that they can sponsor third-party studies that validate their technology, promoting the results to the media.

When one of our clients told us that they had no news scheduled for several months, we designed a survey conducted by an independent research company and garnered significant coverage.

We announced the results of the survey in the form of a press release. A few days later, several media outlets ran articles featuring the results including this one from a leading green building news site.

David Andrew Goldman is director of communications at Expansion Media, an integrated PR/SEO firm that focuses on clean technology clients including AeroFarms, Entech Solar, BioPetroClean, CASTion, Airdye Solutions, Advanced Telemetry, Variable Wind Solutions, GreenRay Inc. and FreeGreen.com.

SECOND FEATURE:  From the Way Back Machine

Building Renewable Energy Markets: A Public Education Stategy for State Clean Energy Funds

 SOURCE: CLEAN ENERGY FUNDS NETWORK: Investing in markets for Clean Energy

2002

By: Lyn Rosoff Chris Colbert, Second Wind Enterprises

with: Richard Earle Greenbranch Enterprises

Exerpt: page 9

Task 1. Craft Motivating Messages/Create a Common Language/Define the Renewable Energy Brand.

Craft messages that deliver sufficient pain/gain motivation and customer benefit to make renewable energy a compelling product to both business and consumer audiences.

Importantly, this should include addressing the impact of the attack of September 11, as well as the Enron collapse, on consumer attitudes and perceptions regarding renewable energy.

We need to find the right nomenclature and icons that reduces the confusion, skepticism and misunderstanding while creating sustained, meaningful visibility.

Excerpt Page 10:

Our view is that the success of such a joint marketing model will be predicated on the following specific steps:

1. Researching (and adjusting to) the new consumer/public attitudes towards energy following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and the Enron collapse and bankruptcy;

2. Developing an effective message platform that will overcome purchase barriers and identify and test common nomenclature for renewable energy: is it green, clean, pollution-free?;

3. Creating a plan for a multi-state shared umbrella campaign employing this learning; and,

4. Implementing that multi-state campaign.

If there is an emerging theme in this effort, it is the idea of integration and building what has been called brand community

Briefly, the concept of a brand community is recognition that markets are made - and consumers are motivated by a combination of influences.

To change societal behavior, one must “infiltrate” social, business and community structures to affect influence, incentive, and impact.

By surrounding the consumer and business targets with integrated symbols, messages and reinforcement from familiar brands and relationships, we stand a chance of changing their views and actions.

To date, renewable energy public education efforts have been approached as a discrete, non-integrated task, dominated by traditional media outreach and public relations. And the results of that limited approach have been subsequently limited.

A successful strategy for marketing renewable energy will require creation of a brand community within which renewable energy will be the preferred (and socially reinforced) choice.

The only way we can effectively build such a brand community is for CEFN and its members to work together and to share their knowledge, their ideas and their resources.

Such a shared model should also extend to proposing different market structures that could be used to support customer choice.

This could involve variations on the default service offerings or other partnering options with green power
markets and utilities.

[...]

 

Each member will then need to integrate other educational tactics, e.g. grass roots outreach, direct mail, collateral, etc. and more specific messages that are relevant to their state’s stage of market readiness.

This tactical integration should then be augmented by each CEFN member leveraging the brand relationships that their target audiences already have: church, employer, and municipality, to add credibility and influence to the education effort.

It is our hope that the proposal that follows will clearly show how we can approach the task of marketing renewable energy together and convert a perplexing, reluctant market into a high growth market that offers significant rewards for consumers, businesses, suppliers, the country and the environment.

9/12/10 Same stories, different locations: Why are people complaining about living near wind turbines? AND How a documentary about rural town facing wind developers is opening eyes

Gerry Meyer in his garden, turbine #4 in background

Wind Turbine Sounds Spur Health Complaints, Force Residents to Move

SOURCE: Acoustic Ecology Institute

The spread of wind turbines into quiet rural areas is leading to increasing complaints that they make more noise than residents were led to believe.

While simple annoyance and sleep disturbance are the most common effects, in some cases, nearby residents are reporting health problems that they associate with the presence of the turbines, leading some to move from their homes.

Not long after wind turbines began to spin in March near Gerry Meyer’s home in Wisconsin, his son Robert, 13, and wife, Cheryl, complained of headaches.

Cheryl also sometimes feels a fluttering in her chest, while Gerry is sometimes nauseated and hears crackling.

The nearest turbine is 1,560 feet from Meyer’s house. His dismay over an energy source he once thought was benign has made the retired mailman, 59, an activist. He travels the state warning communities considering wind farms to be wary.

“I don’t think anyone should have to put up with this,” says Meyer, who compares the sound to a helicopter or a jet taking off.

 In Canada, Helen and Bill Fraser initially supported the nearby wind farm in Melancthon, Ont. One turbine sat close to the Fraser’s kitchen window. “We thought, more green energy, this is great,” Helen told CTV News. However, Helen says she developed headaches, body aches and she had trouble sleeping. The dog began wetting the floor at night.

“There were nights I was lying in bed and my heart would beat to the pulse of the turbine. It was an uneasy feeling,” Helen said.

Ernie Marshall at first supported the wind farm that was placed near his home near Goderich, Ont. However, he also says that once the turbines got rolling, his health began to suffer.

“I had problems with my heart, with my eyes, my digestive system,” Marshall told CTV News. “It traumatizes your whole body.”

Some affected residents can only sell their homes and move away. The Frasers left their home of 32 years and moved to nearby Shelburne, Ont. They say their symptoms have, for the most part, vanished.

Ernie Marshall moved to the town of Seaforth, Ont., which is several kilometers away from the turbines near his former home. “I had to get out or I wouldn’t be standing here talking to you,” Marshall said.

Dr. Nina Pierpont, a pediatrician in upstate New York, has interviewed dozens of people who live near windmills in Canada, the United States and Europe. Her [recently] released book, Wind Turbine Syndrome, documents the litany of health problems experienced by some people who have wind farms near their homes.

Some early findings suggest that wind turbines create a high intensity, low frequency sound that may have an effect on the body. Not only can the sound potentially cause debilitating illness.

Some researchers believe that the vibrations the sound causes in the inner ear may lead to vibro-acoustic disease, which can cause dizziness, nausea and sleep disturbances. However, officials with the Canadian Wind Energy Association point to a handful of studies they say prove that windmills lead to few, if any, adverse health effects.

“We know there have been complaints about health impacts of wind turbines,” Sean Whittaker of the Canadian Wind Energy Association told CTV News. “On the other hand, we know there are some 10,000 turbines installed across North America and complaints have been relatively few.”

The issue has not just put experts at odds. Communities across North America are divided between residents who say local windmills have made them sick and their neighbors who don’t believe them.

“Everyone was calling me a liar,” Ernie Marshall said. “It don’t matter who you talk to. You bring ‘em out here and they’ll say that noise don’t bother us. Sit there for a week under that and listen to it and see what it does to your body.”

The inconsistencies in the early research, coupled with the fact that some residents who live near wind turbines complain of such a wide array of symptoms, are evidence that further study is needed to determine if Wind Turbine Syndrome is a problem, how big of one and what should be done, experts say.

“Depending on your distance you’ll have 30, 40, 50 per cent of people who are troubled, but not 100 per cent,” Dr. Robert McMurtry of the University of Western Ontario told CTV News. “That’s why it’s important to do these studies to see just how many are troubled and how real it is.” 

 

TORONTO INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL: WINDFALL

By Howard Feinstein

Friday, September 10th, 2010 
After reading a few small articles on wind energy in the Delaware County Times, the New York City-based video and commercials editor Laura Israel, who retreats to a 16’ by 16’ cabin outside the town of Meredith in said county, thought she might do something for the green movement and get a wind turbine—and not have to pay for electricity in the bargain.
“I went on the internet and realized, ‘Wind energy is not what I thought.’ I was editing at a place where a guy was doing a tv segment on it as part of green. I told him he should do more research, and he started yelling at me: ‘Do you want a nuclear plant?’ I realized it was a touchy subject. I became suspicious and thought I would look further.

“Then I started to meet some people from Meredith. A lot of them—artists, writers—go up there to be alone. This topic pulled them out of their shells to work together.”

So began Israel’s foray into directing, Windfall, an excellent documentary–a real discovery in Toronto–which is as much a study of a small rural community torn asunder as it is of the pros and cons of the massive turbines which energy salesmen were pitching to the locals.

For a price, the residents could agree to let them build the massive structures on their land. In a town with no zoning, the reps from an energy outfit in Ireland anticipated huge profits.

Even though Delaware County is one of the five poorest in New York State, other towns were not as easily seduced as some of the homeowners in Meredith, who signed contracts for a relative pittance.

Most of those who agreed had been born there, former dairy farmers hard it by the economy and changes in agrarian commerce. Most of the opposition was comprised of former or current residents of New York City, whom the lifetimers, according to Israel, call “flatlanders.”

The feud became bitter, culminating in a new slate of candidates vying in a coming municipal election for the offices long held by lifers. The lines were drawn; the debate became more and more bitter.

“I don’t think it was like that before the subject came up,” says Israel. “There are no chi-chi boutiques there; it’s not that kind of town. It seemed like everyone got along. This subject pushed people into corners.” The lead-up to the election gives the film rhythmic, suspenseful momentum.

Israel interviews her subjects outdoors, capturing a natural, unforced bucolic backdrop enriched by a plucky, country-tinged score.

Most of them have interesting back stories that provide digressive texture. Stop-motion animator Dean Modino brings alive maps, photographs, and, building up over the course of the film’s running time, the wind turbines themselves, already cinematic by design.

As one relative newcomer to Meredith says, “These are not the 50’ windmills of Don Quixote. These are 400’ high.” Each blade is 130’ long, weighs seven tons, and moves at 150 miles per hour. The whishing noise is non-stop, and much worse when it rains.

The well-informed interviewees who stood against the turbines articulate their positions, as do several environmentalists and energy experts.

When erected too near peoples’ homes, the turbines wreak emotional and psychological havoc on the residents. Tug Hill, in Lowville, New York, is one place where 400 of them were built, and the townspeople have found them oppressive.

One subject says that to be built and maintained, they require fossil fuels, and it is questionable if the amount that they put back into the grid is worth the effort. Green and wind energy may be mutually exclusive terms.

Israel is the first to say she does not offer definitive answers. “I’m just asking people to look into it more. I know there’s a lot going on in Europe, even in Denmark. People there are asking if there really is that much power coming from the wind turbines.

“We want desperately to have easy answers. Then all you have to do is send in some money and someone else can take care of it.”



9/11/10 Wisconsin Eye hosts panel on wind issues: WeEnergies, WPPI, Vice Chair of Wind-siting council and Wisconsin author weigh in on wind rules. 

Source: Wisconsin Eye

09.10.10 | Newsmakers: Future of Wind Energy

Wisconsin has more than 300 electricity-generating wind turbines, which can cost up to $4 million each, and developers have plans for hundreds more to meet a requirement that 10% of the state’s energy come from renewable sources by 2015.

Although the Public Service Commission has proposed permanent rules on the siting of those turbines, members of the Wind Siting Council, which studied the issue for six months, have warned that they can pose shadow “flicker,” health and property values problems.

Wind energy was discussed in a Sept. 10 Newsmakers with Dan Ebert, a vice president of WPPI Energy and former Public Service Commission chairman; Andy Hesselbach, Wind Energy Project Manager for We Energies; Doug Zweizig, Town of Union planning official and Wind Siting Council vice chairman, and Lynda Barry, author now researching a book on homes near turbines.

Watch this program by CLICKING HERE

 Listen by CLICKING HERE

TO LINK TO THIS PROGRAM OR TO BUY A COPY, VISIT THE WISCONSIN EYE WEBSITE BY CLICKING HERE

 

WIND TURBINES IN THE NEWS:

WIND TURBINE NOISE, AN INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT

SOURCE Herald Gazette, knox.villagesoup.com

September 10 2010

By Stephen Ambrose and Robert Rand,

Stephen Ambrose and Robert Rand are members of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering. In 2009, they became concerned about the negative comments from residents living near wind turbine sites and, the apparent lack of regulatory action to address the potential for adverse health impacts from wind turbine generator noise in Mars Hill. They launched their own evaluation, and came to the following conclusions in a series of guest columns.

Wind turbines larger than one megawatt of rated power have become an unexpected surprise for many nearby residents by being much louder than expected.

The sounds produced by blades, gearing, and generator are significantly louder and more noticeable as wind turbine size increases. Long blades create a distinctive aerodynamic sound as air shears off the trailing edge and tip.

The sound character varies from a “whoosh” at low wind speeds to “a jet plane that never lands” at moderate and higher wind speeds. Blade-induced air vortices spinning off the tip may produce an audible “thump” as each blade sweeps past the mast.

Thumping can become more pronounced at distance, described as “sneakers in a dryer,” when sounds from multiple turbines arrive at a listener’s position simultaneously.

Wind turbines are not synchronized and so thumps may arrive together or separately, creating an unpredictable or chaotic acoustic pattern.

The sounds of large industrial wind turbines have been documented as clearly audible for miles. They are intrusive sounds that are uncharacteristic of a natural soundscape.

Studies have shown that people respond to changes in sound level and sound character in a predictable manner. A noticeable change in sound level of 5 decibels (dB) may result in “no response” to “sporadic complaints.” An increase of 10 dB may yield “widespread complaints,”; a 15 dB increase “threats of legal action.”

The strongest negative community response occurs with an increase of 20 dB or more, resulting in “vigorous objections.”

Audible tones, variability in sound level, and an unnatural sound character can amplify the public response. For a distinctive or unpleasant sound, a small change in sound level, or the sound simply being audible, may provoke a strong community response.

Community response can intensify further if sleep is disturbed and quality of life or property is degraded.

Weather conditions influence the sound level generated and how it travels to nearby homes. Sound waves expand outward from the wind turbine with the higher frequencies attenuating at a faster rate than low frequencies.

Locations beyond a few thousand feet may be dominated by low frequency sounds generated by the wind turbines.

Wind turbulence and icing, both common in New England due to topography and latitude, increase aerodynamic noise from intensified or chaotic dynamic stall conditions along the blade surfaces.

Atmospheric conditions at night and downwind enhance sound propagation toward the ground by increasing levels over longer distances.

Wind turbines are elevated hundreds of feet to receive stronger winds yet winds down on the ground or in nearby valleys may be non-existent with correspondingly low background sound levels, accentuating the impact of the intrusive sounds.

Other professionals have developed thresholds, or criteria, for sound level to protect public health that may be applied to planning for wind turbine permitting.

Recommendations from Hayes McKenzie Partnership in 2006 limited maximum wind turbine sound levels at residences to 38 dBA and no more than 33 dBA when “beating noises” are audible when the turbines spin.

Dan Driscoll presented his analysis in 2009 (Environmental Stakeholder Roundtable on Wind Power, June 16, 2009) with a Composite Noise Rating analysis of 33 dBA to reduce rural community response to the level of “sporadic complaints.”

Michael Nissenbaum issued his findings in 2010 from his medical study at Mars Hill, recommending a 7000-foot setback for public health.

The World Health Organization published sound level thresholds of sleep disturbance and adverse health effects from peer-reviewed medical studies (Night Noise Guidelines for Europe, October 2009).

Our next column will compare our sound level versus distance data with these medical, health, and community response criteria and show what distances are necessary to protect public health.

Currently there is no effective, reliable noise mitigation for wind turbines of this size other than shutdown.

Therefore, at this time it appears appropriate that proposed wind turbine sites should position wind turbines at least one mile away from residential properties and further for sites with more than one wind turbine. Smaller wind turbines (under one megawatt power rating) produce less noise than those currently being marketed and installed for grid power in Maine; these may be an option when distance is an issue.

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD:

The wind farm mentioned in the following story was cited an example of a successful community wind project by Wind Siting Council member Michael Vickerman

State of Maine finds Fox Island Wind Turbines in violation of noise standard
  SOURCE: Fox Island Wind Neighbors
September 10, 2010 

9/10/10 Director's cut: Documentary "Windfall" : A darker shade of 'green'

WINDFALL" DIRECTOR LAURA ISRAEL UNCOVERS THE DARK SIDE OF ALTERNATIVE ENERGY

SOURCE: Cinemablend.com

September 10, 2010

By Katey Rich

 Laura Israel had been working for as a film editor for decades when the subject that inspired her to direct her first film quite literally showed up on her doorstep.

The New York-based filmmaker had spent years going up to a cabin in remote Meredith, New York without getting to know her neighbors, but when several people in town signed contracts allowing an industrial company to place wind turbines on their property, and several others opposed it, Israel found herself caught in a local political issue that resonated across the country.

The resulting documentary is Windfall, which premieres this week at the Toronto International Film Festival.

In telling the story of Meredith Israel explores the largely hidden downside of allowing wind energy corporations to stake out land in American communities, installing 400-foot high wind turbines so near peoples' homes that residents complain of headaches and respiratory problems, not to mention the diminished property values and general noise of a giant turbine so near one's home.

As the residents in Meredith duke out their concerns at town hall meetings, Israel and her crew also take us to neighboring Tug Hill, where dozens of wind turbines have already changed that small town forever.

Israel doesn't claim to have all the answers about alternative energy and how to reduce our dependence on oil, but says that with Windfall she wants to inspire people to ask questions and look beyond the easy equation that "wind energy= clean energy= good."

I talked to Israel about what inspired her to tell the story, how she's been in touch with other communities also looking for more answers about wind energy, and how making this film got her more involved with her neighbors than she previously expected. Windfall premieres this Friday, September 10th at TIFF. [Toronto Interational Film Festival]


How did this story wind up coming to you? It's obvious you feel passionately about it.

I actually own a little cabin in the woods up in Meredith. I started reading little articles in the local paper there, just mentioning "when the wind energy comes," or "when we get turbines."

I decided, oh, I would love to have a wind turbine. I started looking into it a little further, and I was really taken aback by what I found.

Because of the complexities of the issues, I thought it would make a good topic for a short film. When we started filming I realized it was much bigger topic than I thought.

Did you know most of the people we see in this movie before you started making the film?

No. I had this cabin and I went there to just be alone. When they started to raise concerns, I thought "They seem like perfectly reasonable people. "

If that's the case, and they're also raising concerns about it, there must be more of the story. Once we start looking into it, wind energy has so many different facets-- the financial, the political, the engineering. The film started to get longer.

When you start making the film, you can't participate in the issue the way you would have. How did you adjust to that?

The thing is, the issue really changed a lot. I really tried to keep the whole film from the town's point of view. We find out about things as they find out about things. That's how it happened.

The people speaking in favor of wind energy are all people based on the local level, and you don't have anyone from the wind companies themselves. Was that a deliberate choice?

Because I did it from the town's point of view, if you notice, there are no wind companies at the meetings answering questions.

That's one of the reasons why the wind people aren't in the film. They get contracts, and all of a sudden they are really scarce, and I wanted to represent that in the film, their absence.

The film isn't an expose about wind, it's more like the experience of the town. People who live among turbines are trying to get the word out about problems they're having, and I wanted to give voice to them, rather than the wind companies.

It looks like you've been in touch with a lot of people in other cities dealing with wind.

Yeah, even after we just put up the website and the trailer, I started to get a lot of requests for the film. I felt really motivated to get the film out to Toronto, and out to communities that want more information. I have been approached by quite a few people. People have been telling me their stories, and it's very moving.


Do you have a particular favorite alternative energy solution, as a viable solution that isn't industrial wind power?

I don't think the answer is going to be simple. It's something that we as a larger community have to work out the same way that Meredith did, which is really sitting down and trying to figure out, well, how are we going to negotiate something like that.

A lot of people would like to think that this is the answer, let's just do this. I think it's going to be a lot more difficult than that.

Communities being able to decide their future, and decide how they can get power instead of centralizing it among all these really big international corporations-- personally I would rather see that. I think it's something that we all have to decide and try and work toward.

Is it valid to say that wind is the lesser of the evils for energy sources?

I don't want to lull people into thinking that I have all the answers, or that the film is going to give them all the answers. I'm just trying to ask people to look closer at it. Gordon says in the film, "Ask questions, do your homework."

I also think there's a bit of corporate accountability that should be brought up here. If people are having trouble living near these things, do some studies.

There are lot of people having trouble living near the low-frequency sound, and I think they're being ignored.

And if wind turbines are killing bats in really large numbers, then let's study that.

In towns, residents shouldn't be intimidated by these corporations when they want to come in and do the development.

Public officials who have a financial interest should not be making decisions on turbines. People should have unbiased information available to them so they can be part of the process of the future of their communities.