Better Plan, Wisconsin

Home for sale, Blue Sky/ Green Field project, Fond du Lac County, WI Photo: Jim Bembinster

On May 6th, 2010 two doctors gave presentations about wind turbine noise at the Rutland Regional Medical Center in Rutland, Vermont.

Robert J. McCunney, M.D. was one of the doctors hired by both the American Wind Energy Association and the Canadian Wind Energy Association to review existing peer-reviewed literature about possible negative health effects from wind turbines noise. He is credited as being one of the seven authors of a white paper called "Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects: An Expert Panel Review" which found no negative health effects from wind turbine noise.

Michael Nissenbaum, M.D. is specialist in diagnostic imaging, whose training and work involves developing and utilizing an understanding of the effects of energy deposition, including sound, on human tissues. He is a former Associate Director of MRI at a major Harvard hospital, a former junior faculty member at Harvard University. He conducted medical interviews with residents of the Mars Hill wind project in Maine, and with a control group of residents who live three miles from the project. His conclusions were quite different than those of the AWEA/CANWEA funded study.

The findings of these two medical professionals are detailed in a presentation which has been posted on YouTube in ten minute segments.

Click on the links below to watch

Part One: Introduction and opening remarks by Dr. McCunney

Part Two: Dr. McCunney

Part Three; Dr. McCunney

Part Four: Conclusion by Dr. McCunney, Opening remarks by Dr. Nissenbaum

Part Five: Dr. Nissenbaum

Part Six: Dr. Nissenbaum

Part Seven: Dr. Nissenbaum concluding remarks and questions for Dr. Nissenbaum and Dr. McCunney

Part Eight: questions for Dr. Nissenbaum and Dr. McCunney

Part Nine: questions for Dr. Nissenbaum and Dr. McCunney

Click on the images below to see what shadow flicker looks like in the Butler Ridge wind project near Iron Ridge Wisconsin. Filmed enroute to the Wind Siting Council meeting on May 4th, 2010.

“The notion that the wind industry is predominantly made up of small, environmentally conscious operations is one that must be quickly dispelled.

These are large, corporate-scale utility companies, not unlike coal and oil conglomerates … with a checkered environmental track record to date.

Voluntary guidelines will not change that paradigm, and will work about as well as voluntary taxes.”

George Fenwick

President, American Bird Conservancy

May 11, 2010

SOURCE: Science News UPI.com

INVENERGY TRIES TO WOO BROWN COUNTY FOR WIND FARM PROJECT

SOURCE Green Bay Press-Gazette, www.greenbaypressgazette.com

May 11, 2010

By Tony Walter,

Invenergy LLC officials say they have a track record of profitable projects and satisfied customers to support their efforts to bring a wind farm to Brown County.

“If one looks overall at this, they’ll see there’s a high level of comfort,” said Kevin Parzyck, project manager for the proposed 100-turbine Ledge Wind Energy Project in four towns in southern Brown County. “Our feeling is that it’s a benefit to the community.”

Invenergy, one of the six largest wind energy companies in the country, according to the American Wind Energy Association, wants the local project to become its 23rd wind farm in the United States.

It awaits siting guidelines from the Wisconsin Public Service Commission as it fends off opposition from a citizens group that is protesting the location in Morrison, Wrightstown, Glenmore and Holland.

The PSC is expected to announce the guidelines by July, and Invenergy plans to resubmit its proposal based on those rules.

Many property owners in Brown County have signed contracts with Invenergy to permit wind turbines on their land in exchange for annual payments of approximately $8,000. Other property owners insist that the wind turbines will have negative health and safety impacts and will reduce property values.

But Invenergy officials say they have public opinion on their side.

The Wisconsin Legislature has been debating a bill that would require one-fourth of the state’s energy to come from renewable sources by 2025. And a poll commissioned by the American Wind Energy Association claims that 89 percent of American voters believe that increasing reliance on wind energy is a good idea.

Parzyck said the proposed wind farm in Brown County is not a reckless plan and has the potential of being a $300 million project when completed.

“There has to be a rock solid plan in place if you’re going to have a huge upfront investment,” he said.

The opposition group, Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy, is misinforming the public, he said.

“The one thing I would say is this group is extremely well-funded and well connected statewide,” he said.

“They have said they do not believe renewable energy makes sense in Wisconsin, but that flies in the face of what the Legislature and electorate has asked for. And they haven’t offered any alternatives.”

The citizens group has said it doesn’t oppose wind turbines but objects to their locations. The decisions on where to locate the turbines were based on the towns’ zoning ordinances at the time, Parzyck said.

Bill Hafs, the county’s land and water conservation director, said he has been in contact with Invenergy officials to discuss the possible impact of wind turbine construction on groundwater. But he said the county has no say on the wind farm issue.

Invenergy’s financial worth isn’t disclosed because it is a privately owned company. It has wind farms in 14 states and one in Canada.

SECOND FEATURE:

FEDERAL WIND FARM RULES MAY NOT SAVE BIRDS

United Press International, www.upi.com

 May 10, 2010

The American Bird Conservancy says it fears proposed voluntary guidelines for wind farms will not prevent the deaths of birds by the turbines.

ABC President George Fenwick said Monday he sent letters to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and Bureau of Land Management Director Bob Abbey identifying key shortcomings in recent federal plans to address the affects of wind farms on birds.

“I find it ironic that the Interior Department is asking us to believe that the wind industry will follow voluntary guidelines when their own land management agency is not even doing so,” Fenwick said.

Fenwick said the Fish and Wildlife Wind Advisory Committee has made excellent recommendations for the generation of wind power that the conservancy wants adopted throughout the federal government. But Fenwick said the major shortcoming in the recommendations is that they are proposed as voluntary, rather than mandatory, and as such will do little to curb unacceptable levels of bird mortality and habitat loss at wind farms.

“The notion that the wind industry is predominantly made up of small, environmentally conscious operations is one that must be quickly dispelled,” Fenwick said. “These are large, corporate-scale utility companies, not unlike coal and oil conglomerates … with a checkered environmental track record to date. Voluntary guidelines will not change that paradigm, and will work about as well as voluntary taxes.”

THIRD FEATURE: A letter from a bat and a Wisconsin conservationist

The Bat in the Wind Turbine Facility… Today’s Canary in the Coal Mine

By Kevin Kawula

May 11, 2010 

Things are going badly for our wildlife populations in and around the operating industrial scale wind projects in Wisconsin.

Anecdotal reports from people living in Wisconsin wind projects report an absence of normal wildlife, i.e. no turkey, no deer, fewer or no songbirds, and no bats. Relatives and friends outside the wind facility report greater numbers of deer and turkey.
 
 The birds and deer are leaving the area, but the bats are as likely to be dieing, as leaving.

A recent post-construction bird and bat mortality report, conducted by We Energies (WEPCO) CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD  as part of receiving approval for it’s Blue Sky Green Field project, shows that the bird deaths were 11 to 12 bird deaths/per turbine/per year. This is four times higher than the national average of 3 bird kills/per turbine/per year.

Even more alarming are the bat kill rates of 40.54 to 41/per turbine/per year This is more than ten times the reported national average of less than 4 per turbine per year.

Wisconsin's turbine related bat deaths are among the highest in North America, and equal to the bat mortality numbers from Pennsylvania/Appalachia area which stunned conservationists across the nation.

The total number of bats killed by the 88 turbine Blue Sky Green Field project is estimated to be between 3,500 to 3,600 per year.

Two additional post construction reports show the same bat kill rates at the Cedar Ridge project, and slightly higher kill rates at Invenergy Forward Energy project near the Horicon Marsh.

These three projects alone have resulted in an estimated 8,000 bat deaths per year.

That's 16,000 dead bats for the two years these projects have been in operation.

According to page 66 and 67 of the Public Service Commission's Environmental Impact Statement, the bat kill numbers for the pending Glacier Hills wind project are expected to be equally as high, adding at least another 3500 turbine related bat deaths per year.

Can Wisconsin bat populations sustain this kind of impact?

Bats are not being struck by the blades (135 feet long with tip speeds of 180mph), but are suffering catastrophic damage to their lungs as they fly into the low-pressure zone that is created behind the rotating blades.

This drop in pressure causes their lungs to expand rapidly, burst, fill with fluid and blood, and they drown. It is called barotrauma – deep-sea divers get a version of it called the bends, when raised too quickly from the depths.

Birds have different lung structures, so they are not as readily affected, but bats are mammals and have lungs much more similar to ours, so take a deep breath, and imagine you can’t stop inhaling until your lungs burst. 
 
Bats live up to thirty years, reproduce slowly, maybe one pup a year, and and because they maintain tight family groups, the loss of a single bat can have a significant impact.

Bats are a vital link in the natural balance of Wisconsin’s wild and not so wild areas.

I cannot think of a time in human history that bats have not been flying over Wisconsin, but the loss of our bat population could happen in our lifetimes.
 
White nose syndrome, a nasal/respiratory fungus, is threatening cave roosting/hibernating species of bats, in the eastern United States into extinction, but has not yet reached Wisconsin.

Industrial wind turbines kill all species of bats, even the tree roosting/migrating species we hoped might be spared from the white nose blight.

If the state continues to follow its plan to add 200 to 300 new industrial turbines each year until 2025, turbine related bat deaths could be as high as 131,200 to 192,700 bats per year.
 
This total annual mortality number is unlikely, because the remaining bat populations would likely crash from mounting annual losses before then.
 
I am asking that  we, as conservationists, help stop this needless slaughter.

Contact the Department of Natural Resources and the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin with your concerns.
 
Shari Koslowsky, Conservation Biologist with the DNR, has been very helpful in explaining the post construction mortality numbers. She can be reached at shari.koslowsky@wisconsin.gov , (608) 261- 4382.
  
My main concern is that there is no representative of any organization with expertise in wildlife and natural habitat protection on the Wind Siting Council. The Wind Siting Council is a 15 member organization currently working on creating guidelines for siting wind turbines in our state.
 
I am asking that the DNR require the PSC to stop the operation of industrial scale wind turbine facilities at night (curtailment) when electrical demand is low and easily met by existing base load generation which cannot be shut off. 

The period from dusk until dawn must be reserved for migrating and feeding wildlife as an equitable distribution of a state (“free wind”) natural resource, for the greater good of the whole rural community, human and animal. Night time curtailment would ensure safe passage for bats and night migrating birds, and provide a reliable period of quiet for the undisturbed sleep that is vital to any being's health. 
  
CLICK HERE to leave a comment on the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin’s Wind Siting Council’s docket.
  
Thank you all for your time and consideration on this issue. Energy independence will eventually mean grid independence, but until then the decision makers need to face the facts and take responsibility for the harm caused by their decisions, and remedy the problem.
 
 Thanks again,

 Kevin Kawula

Board member of the Rock County Conservationists, TPE Member, Spring Valley Planning and Zoning board member, Owner and operator of Lone Rock Prairie Nursery, and Rock County Parks Volunteer.
lonerockprairienursery@gmail.com

WHAT WIND TURBINES MEAN CAN MEAN FOR BIRDS:

Click on the images below to watch wind turbine shadow flicker in the 36 turbine Butler Ridge project in Dodge County, Wisconsin. Each turbine in this video is 400 feet tall. Filmed on the morning of May 4th, 2010 en route to a Wind Siting Council meeting hosted at the home of council member Larry Wusch who lives in the Invenergy Forward Energy project located about twenty miles north of Butler Ridge.

This turbine in this video emitted a high pitched whistle as well as low pulsing jet sounds.

This video shows how long the turbine shadows are, and what shadow flicker looks like when it covers a field, a house and a barn

THE NEXT WIND SITING COUNCIL MEETING IS CANCELLED FOR 9AM WEDNESDAY MAY 12 2010 AT THE PSC

Public Service Commission Building

610 North Whitney Way

Madison, Wisconsin

 [Click here for map]

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: For some, watching a Wind Siting Council Meeting is like watching paint dry. For others it's like watching people toss your future around in their hands. For the BPWI Research Nerd (who is working on a book about the experiences of wind farm residents in our state) it's a front row seat on the creation of siting standards that will either protect the people and avian species of our state, or protect the interests of wind developers, utilities and wind lobbyists.

Will residents of Wisconsin wind projects be heard?

SPOILER ALERT: Because of the composition of the WSC , the Research Nerd predicts the interests of the wind developers, utilities, and wind lobbyists will win out over the protection of the people and bats and birds of rural Wisconsin who will be living with the fallout of wind development.

Unless--- by some miracle---the PSC Horton Hears a Rural Wisconsin Who.

If you'd like to make your voice heard, CLICK HERE to leave a public comment on the Wind Siting Council Docket. What you post will become public record. There is no limit to the number of posts you can make. You are free to post opinion, articles, documents, and video links. Anything that you would like the wind siting council to consider.

It's Better Plan's understanding that though some of the council members do pay attention to the docket, there is no requirement that the council read any of the posts.

WHAT'S ON THE WSC DOCKET TODAY?

This "energy sprawl" of giant turbines and pylons will require far greater amounts of concrete and steel than conventional power plants—figure on anywhere from 870 to 956 cubic feet of concrete per megawatt of electricity and 460 tons of steel (32 times more concrete and 139 times as much steel as a gas-fired plant).

From a review of "Power Hungry" by Robert Bryce  SOURCE: The Wall Street Journal

ON THE WSC DOCKET: Better Plan thanks Curt Hilgenberg and Julie Bixby-Wendt for taking the time to post to the docket.

This Post from Curt Hilgenberg, Town of Holland, Brown County includes an article about wind power By Robert Bryce in the Wall Street Journal. The quote above is from Bruce's book, "Power Hungry", released in April.

March 1, 2010 by Robert Bryce in Wall Street Journal

People living near turbines increasingly report sleep deprivation, headaches and vertigo. The wind lobby says there's no proof

Imagine this scenario: The oil and gas industry launches an aggressive global drilling program with a new type of well. Thousands of these new wells, once operational, emit a noxious odor so offensive that many of the people living within a mile of them are kept awake at night. Some are even forced to move out of their homes. It's easy to predict the reaction: denunciations of the industry, countless lawsuits, and congressional investigations.

Now substitute wind for oil and gas and consider the noise complaints being lodged against wind projects around the world.

The Obama administration has made the increased use of wind power to generate electricity a top priority. In 2009 alone, U.S. wind generation capacity increased by 39%. But more wind power means more giant turbines closer to more people. And if current trends continue, that spells trouble.

In 2007, a phalanx of wind turbines were built around Charlie Porter's property in rural northern Missouri. Soon, Mr. Porter began to have trouble sleeping. So did his wife and daughter. The noise, he told me, made sleeping almost impossible. "We tried everything-earplugs, leaving the TV station on all night." Nothing worked. Late last year he moved his family off their 20-acre farm.

Mr. Porter's story is no isolated event. Rural residents in Texas, Maine, Pennsylvania, Oregon, New York, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, France and England have been complaining about the noise from wind turbines, particularly about sleep deprivation.

Dozens of news stories-most of them published in rural newspapers-have documented the problem.

I've spoken to nine other people in New York, Wisconsin, Ontario, New Zealand, Nova Scotia and England who live, or lived, near wind turbines. All complained of the noise, with sleep deprivation being the most common complaint. For example, Janet Warren, who raises sheep near Makara, New Zealand, told me via email that the turbines near her home emit "continuous noise and vibration," which disturb her sleep and are causing "loss of concentration, irritability, and short-term memory effects."

Complaints about sleep disruption-as well as the deleterious health effects caused by the pulsing, low-frequency noise emitted by the giant turbines-are a central element of an emerging citizen backlash against the booming global wind industry.

Lawsuits that focus on noise pollution are now pending in Maine, Pennsylvania and New Zealand. In New Zealand, more than 750 complaints have been lodged against a large wind project near Makara since it began operating last April. The European Platform Against Windfarms lists 388 groups in 20 European countries. Canada has more than two dozen antiwind groups. In the U.S. there are about 100 such groups, and state legislators in Vermont recently introduced a bill that will require wind turbines be located no closer than 1.25 miles from any residence.

In theory, big wind projects should only be built in desolate areas. But the reality is that many turbines are being installed close to homes. Wind developers put a turbine within 550 meters of Mr. Porter's house. Hal Graham, a retired office manager in Cohocton, N.Y., complains about the noise pollution caused by a turbine 300 meters from his home. Tony Moyer, a plumbing superintendent in Eden, Wis., grumbles about the noise generated by three turbines built within 425 meters of his house.

Doctors and acoustics experts from the U.S. to Australia report a raft of symptoms that they blame on wind turbine noise, including sleep disturbance, headaches and vertigo. Dr. Nina Pierpont, a pediatrician in Malone, N.Y., has studied 36 people affected by wind turbine noise since 2004 at her own expense.

The people she interviewed were widely dispersed; they lived in the U.S., Canada, England, Ireland and Italy. She found that the collection of symptoms she calls "wind turbine syndrome" disappeared as soon as people moved out of their noise-affected homes and into new locations at least five miles from any turbines.

Across the border, Ontario-based orthopedic surgeon Dr. Robert McMurtry has been researching wind turbine noise for the past 18 months. Dr. McMurtry, a fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, counts more than 100 people in Ontario he believes are experiencing adverse effects from turbine noise. "It has compromised their health," he says.

The wind lobby has publicly rejected these claims. In December, the American Wind Energy Association in conjunction with the Canadian Wind Energy Association, issued a report titled "Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects: An Expert Review Panel."

It declared: "There is no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects." It also suggested that some of the symptoms being attributed to wind turbine noise were likely psychosomatic and asserted that the vibrations from the turbines are "too weak to be detected by, or to affect, humans."

Yet the report also noted that in "the area of wind turbine health effects, no case-control or cohort studies have been conducted as of this date." True enough-but it means there are no studies to prove or disprove the case. It also says that "a small number of sensitive people" may be "stressed" by wind turbine noise and suffer sleep deprivation. But who gets to define "sensitive" and "small number"? And if turbine noise and sleep disturbance aren't problems, then why are people in so many different locations complaining in almost identical ways? Such questions are only going to be pressed with more urgency in the future.

By 2030, environmental and lobby groups are pushing for the U.S. to produce 20% of its electricity from wind. According to the Department of Energy, meeting that goal will require the U.S. to have about 300,000 megawatts of wind capacity, an eightfold increase over current levels. Installing tens of thousands of new turbines inevitably means they'll be located closer to populated areas.

The health effects of low-frequency noise on humans are not well understood. The noise in question often occurs at, or below, decibel levels that are commonly considered a public nuisance. And detecting low-frequency noise requires sophisticated acoustic gear. For all of these reasons, this issue should be investigated. If policy makers are serious about considering all of the impacts of "green" energy, then an impartial, international study of the effects of wind turbine noise should be undertaken without delay.

Mr. Bryce is the managing editor of Energy Tribune. His fourth book, "Power Hungry: The Myths of 'Green' Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future," will be published in April by PublicAffairs.

Web link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487042... 

POST TO THE WSC DOCKET FROM

Julie Bixby-Wendt

Greenleaf, Wisconsin

Submitted May 8, 2010

 Below are my comments that I emailed to Fox 11 and other news stations, newspapers and State representatives:

I watched your story about the "Wind Wars" going on in the Town of Morrison. I am a resident of the town and wondered if you are aware that property owners who have vacant land next to a property owner who has signed an easement for a wind turbine are receiving absolutely no compensation, even though they are basically taking away 500 feet of our land at every side where a turbine will be placed, because the 1,000-foot setback is from a dwelling rather than the property line.

My husband and I own 40 acres of vacant land. There are proposed wind turbines on property next to at least two sides of our land, and they only have to be 500 feet away from our property.

We have kept this property with the intention that our children might someday build their homes on this land. Because any dwelling will have to be placed 1,000 feet away from a turbine, they are effectively taking away at least 500 feet of our land without any compensation to us.

If they make the setbacks from a dwelling larger, that will mean more of our property will be stolen from us. What happened to our encroachment rights?

Every time I hear someone say how much money this wind farm could bring to property owners, it makes me very upset!

I would like to hear someone reporting on how our state and the power companies are stealing from property owners and shoving these wind turbines down our throats! They should have to get a vote from a town as to whether or not they would like to host a wind farm before they can even come into a town and sneak around getting easements from anyone who will sign up.

Also, even though the people in our town have to live with the wind turbines, the town will receive less money than the county for having them here (town gets 1/3, county gets 2/3).

Even their sneaking around is underhanded.

We were approached to host a wind turbine and were told all of our neighbors were signing up so we might as well get in on the action. They even mentioned names of our neighboring property owners who had signed up, so we were somewhat interested...until I took the contract to an attorney who told me it was a terrible contract.

So now, because we are not hosting a turbine we are not receiving any money, and they are taking some of our land anyway because the setbacks are not the same from the property line as from a dwelling. This just isn't right!

Besides the actions our town is taking (apparently the state has made it impossible for a town to do much against wind turbines), we just don`t know who to contact who can help us, and others like us, who are being robbed.

I don`t know when alternative energy became more important than people, but our government is definitely not standing up for the people. If you have any suggestions as to where we can get help with this, it would be deeply appreciated!

 I affirm that these comments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
 

Julie Bixby-Wendt

Want to keep up with what's going on with the wind siting council? For some it's like watching paint dry, for others it's watching people toss your future around in their hands

Remember to check the docket

Click here to visit the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin website

Type in Docket number 1-AC-231

WHAT'S THE LATEST ON THE DOCKET?

EXTRA CREDIT: Click on the image above to hear another wind turbine that whistles because of a faulty blade.

Note from the BPWI Research Nerd: Click on the image above to hear what wind turbines sound like, how the quality of the sound changes depending on where you stand, and why so many in our state are having trouble living with them. Where wind developers venture, a torn up community is sure to follow. Though the following letter is from a resident of rural New York State, it could have come from any of the many communities in Wisconsin where wind developers looking to control land and make money do not hesitate to practice the art of turning neighbor against neighbor.

WIND COMPANY HAS NOT BEEN FORTHRIGHT WITH THE COMMUNITY

SOURCE: Watertown Daily Times, www.watertowndailytimes.com

May 9 2010

Several years ago, our small community was targeted by representatives of the wind company, Iberdrola Renewables, cleverly disguised as environmentalists. They quietly scoped out our farmers and large landowners, promising them large incomes, lower taxes and community gain. For a long time they appeared to have kept their plans under wraps; this prevented the rest of the community from knowing what was in the works during the early stages. Now that this intrigue has unfolded, our once close-knit community has been left in ruins before the approval of even one wind turbine has taken place.

The company now apparently intends to open an office in Hammond, creating the façade of an honorable business environment. Even this simple event seems rife with rumors, denials and accusations. Iberdrola Renewables will not respond to questions by the media, even regarding opening an office, unless in the form of an e-mail. Employees of Iberdrola have refused to have an open forum with our citizens. They have attended our Wind Advisory Committee meetings but would not answer questions unless presented in writing prior to the meeting. I do not hold these representatives personally responsible, since they are but the hired hands of the foreign wind company, doing their job as directed. It would appear that the direction is to be vague, avoid direct answers and spread information that ignores much of the real science behind the industry. Destroying relationships in our town is merely collateral damage.

I say to Iberdrola, you are not guests in our community. You did not approach our townspeople with an open meeting to present your agenda, fielding questions and inviting the community to participate in any plans. I believe you are here to make money at the expense of the people you purport to be helping. You have shown yourselves to be evasive and secretive. Doing business with any other company that behaves in this manner would be unacceptable even to the most gullible consumer, but you have insinuated yourselves with promises of big money and environmental commitment. Even the best among us have been taken in. I urge our citizens to see you as you truly are, and encourage you to go elsewhere, leaving us to clean up the wreckage your well-planned assault has left behind.

Brooke Stark

Hammond