Entries in Brown County Invenergy (2)
10/27/10 Why send the PSC wind rules back? What are the concerns?
SAVE THE DATE!!!
On Tuesday, November 9th the Assembly Committee on Commerce, Utilites, Energy and Rail will hold a full public hearing at the capitol because of questions raised regarding the Public Service Commission's new wind siting rules for the state of Wisconsin.
The public is encouraged to attend and to provide testimony regarding specific concerns about the rules.
Tuesday, November 9th at 10:30 a.m. in Room 417 North at the State Capitol Building: Hearing relating to Clearinghouse Rule 10-057
Note from the BPWI Research Nerd: Concerns now being raised about the new wind siting rules created by the Public Service Commission were clearly outlined in this request from members of local government in three towns in Brown County. This document was submitted to the PSC on June 23, 2010.
TO: Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Docket No. 1-AC-231 Draft Chapter 128--Wind Energy Systems
Request by the Towns of Morrison, Wrightstown and Glenmore
Brown County, Wisconsin
June 23, 2010
Issue: Request to delay issuing the PSCW wind siting standards until epidemiological studies of health complaints from Wisconsin`s current wind farms are thoroughly completed.
The towns of Morrison, Wrightstown, and Glenmore in Brown County are very concerned about the mounting evidence that there are serious negative impacts on human and animal health caused by wind turbines. It appears it is not only reasonable to delay the issuance of wind siting standards but it would be irresponsible to not do so in light of new studies and ongoing complaints of residents in and near Wisconsin`s existing wind farms.
In general, scientifically and statistically relevant studies have been limited. But, a very important report was published March 2010 by the World Health Organization (WHO) entitled "Night Noise Guidelines for Europe" (available at euro.who.int/en/what-we-publish/abstracts/night-noise-guidelines-for-europe).
The report is based on a six-year evaluation of scientific evidence by thirty-five scientists from medical and acoustical disciplines. WHO indicated that now governments have justifications to regulate noise exposure at night. WHO sets the limit for annual average exposure to not exceed 40 decibels (dB) outside of a residence.
WHO stated, "Recent research clearly links exposure to night noise with harm to health. Sleep disturbance and annoyance are the first effects of night noise and can lead to mental disorders. Just like air pollution and toxic chemicals, noise is an environmental hazard to health". WHO stated that they hope their new report will prompt governments to invest effort and money in protecting health from this growing hazard.
Our towns ask the PSCW to acquire the WHO report and evaluate its application to setting appropriate sound levels for wind turbines.
The PSCW`s draft rules do not address low frequency noise levels. It is not known whether the WHO report addresses this issue but other studies have described the likely effects. This is another area where epidemiological studies are needed before wind turbine setbacks can be reasonably proposed.
Besides sleep disturbance, there are complaints of other physiological problems. It is not acceptable to ignore or minimize the significance of these impacts as just quirks of human imagination.
Also, there is evidence that existing wind farms in Wisconsin are negatively affecting farm animals. Whether it is noise or some other physical phenomena, studies and testing should be done before setting siting standards.
At a public meeting of the Brown County Health Department and the Brown County Human Services Committee, reputable medical and health experts stressed the importance of epidemiological studies to determine the true nature of health impacts of wind turbines.
The State Board of Health pointed out that the lack of funding is a hurdle. But a conviction to do the right thing should prompt the PSCW to make a case to pursue the money issue with state legislators as well as our U.S. senators and representatives. Certainly, our towns would help in this endeavor. That said, it is even more appropriate for the wind developers and their associations to offer funding for independent studies since such studies should reduce future litigation. Electric utilities should have a stake in this effort as well. This is an opportunity to involve the University of Wisconsin research capabilities in both human health and animal health.
It appears that Act 40 does not set a deadline for completing the siting rules. This week a state senator who was one of the leaders in passing the wind siting law agreed that studies should be done to be sure the rules are adequate. If one or two years were used to study the existing wind farms while delaying any new installations, the developers would still have time to help utilities meet their 15% RPS by 2015. Again, if needed, our towns would help in getting the support of legislators.
Our towns implore the PSCW and the Wind Siting Council to not ignore the evidence of potentially serious health impacts and to not set standards until they have done the obvious and reasonable step of studying the health impacts of existing wind turbine installations in Wisconsin. Professional ethics demands no less. We believe our request aligns with the PSCW`s responsibility to protect the citizens of Wisconsin.
Submitted for the towns by Glen R. Schwalbach, P.E.
SECOND FEATURE:
OREGON STATE TO STUDY WIND TURBINE RELATED HEALTH IMPACTS
SOURCE: STATE OF OREGON, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
|
|||||||
WIND TURBINES IN THE NEWS:
Massive Protest Greets Wind Turbine Developers
FERGUS — A massive protest greeted officials from WPD Canada in Fergus Tuesday evening, and flowed into the renewable energy developer’s open house on the proposed Springwood Wind Project (formerly known as Belwood Wind Farm), a four turbine wind energy system planned for agricultural land in the northwest corner of Centre Wellington. Upwards of 1,000 people, several horses and a wagon filled with manure occupied the front parking lot of the Centre Wellington Sportsplex on Belsyde Ave E.
SOURCE: www.chronicle-express.com
Jerusalem, N.Y. — John Grabski, representing the Jerusalem Preservation Association, brought a seldom explored topic to the subject of wind farms at the Oct. 20 Jerusalem Town Council meeting – economic devaluation.
Public discussions on wind farms usually include noise, flicker, dead birds and discontented cows. Grabski pointed to those briefly, but his main point was to suggest measures to protect against personal property value loss.
Instead of looking at the big picture of how much money wind turbines could bring to the town and landowners, he pointed out in a detailed approach how money could be lost long term.“According to expert organizations such as professional Certified Real Estate Appraisers, industrial wind development adversely impacts land values within the immediate wind-zone and a peripheral area of approximately two miles,” according to Grabski.
THIRD FEATURE
Three reports, created specifically to guide legislators in wind turbine siting decisions, and alert them to areas of concern, all identify a half mile as the minimum setback needed to mitigate major problems from turbine noise and shadow flicker.
The Reports include:
The National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies of Science Report "Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects". (2007) [Download Document]
The Congressional Research Service Report prepared for Members and Committees of Congress "Wind Power in the United States: Technology, Economic, and Policy Issues (2008) [Download document]
The Minnesota Department of Health, Environmental Health Division In response to a request from: Minnesota Department of Commerce, Office of Energy Security: "Public Health Impacts of Wind Turbines" (2009) [Download Document]
IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS WHICH SUPPORT A SET BACK OF 2640 FEET FROM HOMES
The Noise Heard Round the World - the trouble with industrial wind turbines
1/2 mile more or more setback
www.wind-watch.org/alerts/?p=591
Simple guidelines for siting wind turbines to prevent health risks
George W. Kamperman, INCE Bd. Cert. Emeritus Kamperman Associates, Inc. george@kamperman.com
Richard R. James, INCE E-Coustic Solutions rickjames@e-coustic.com
1km (3280 feet) or more setback
www.windaction.org/?module=uploads&func=download&fileId=1650
French Academy of Medicine warns of wind turbine noise
1.5km (.9-mile) setback
kirbymtn.blogspot.com/2006/03/french-academy-of-medicine-warns-of.html
National Wind Watch
1-mile setback
www.wind-watch.org/press-070402.php
U.K. Noise Association
1-mile setback
U.K. Noise Association: 1 mile setback needed for wind turbines
kirbymtn.blogspot.com/2006/08/uk-noise-association-1-mile-setback.html
UK Noise Association - Wind Farms are Causing Noise Problems
www.windaction.org/news/4230
Beech Ridge Wind Farm, West Virginia
1 to 4 miles setback
www.beechridgewind.com/Docs/1-25-06_Beech_Ridge_Wind_Fa_Sheet.pdf
Deal reached in wind turbine dispute - Fayette County
6000 foot setback
www.windaction.org/news/16447
www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/fayette/s_573705.html
Noise Radiation from Wind Turbines Installed New Homes: Effects o Health
2km (1.2 mile) setback
www.windturbinenoisehealthhumanrights.com/wtnhhr_june2007.pdf
Location, Location, Location. An investigation into wind farms and noise by the Noise Association
1 to 1.5 mile setback
www.windaction.org/documents/4281
Are wind farm turbines making people sick? Some say yes.
1.5 mile setback
www.pantagraph.com/articles/2008/04/17/news/doc4807500d59725857996033.txt
Dr. Nina Pierport
1.5 mile setback, more for mountainous geography
Health Effects of Wind Turbine Noise
www.windturbinesyndrome.com/?p=76
Noisy Wind and Hot Air
www.windturbinesyndrome.com/?p=69
Wind Turbine Syndrome - testimony before the New York State Legislature Energy Committee
www.savewesternny.org/docs/pierpont_testimony.html
except from rebuttal to Noble Environmental’s draft Environmental Impact Statement regarding noise, shadow flicker, and health
www.windturbinesyndrome.com/?p=100
Wind Turbines, Noise and Health
Dr. Amanda Harry
1.5 mile setback
www.windturbinenoisehealthhumanrights.com/wtnoise_health_2007_a_barry.pdf
Riverside County, California
2-mile setback
www.rcip.org/documents/general_plan/gen_plan/03_d_16.pdf
Marjolaine Villey-Migraine
Docteur en sciences de l’information et de la communication, Université Paris II-Panthéon-Assas, Spècialiste de l’Information Scientifique et Technique (IST)
5 km (3.1 miles)
www.wind-watch.org/documents/?p=588
Microseismic and Infrasound Monitoring of Low Frequency Noise and Vibrations from Windfarms
10km (6.2-mile) setback
www.esci.keele.ac.uk/geophysics/dunlaw/Final_Report.pdf
NOISE RESEARCH
Facts About Wind Energy and Noise
www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/WE_Noise.pdf
“Anti-noise” Silences Wind Turbines, publication date August 2008
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080811095500.htm
New England Wind Forum: Wind Turbine Sound
US Department of Energy
www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/windpoweringamerica/ne_issues_sound.asp
“Noise Radiation from Wind Turbines Installed Near Homes: Effects on Health.”
with an annotated review of the research and related issues
by Barbara J Frey, BA, MA and Peter J Hadden, BSc, FRICS
www.windturbinenoisehealthhumanrights.com/wtnhhr_june2007.pdf
Noise pollution from wind turbines
September 20, 2007 by Julian Davis and S. Jane Davis
www.windaction.org/documents/13040
This is a list of publications from the Acoustics Laboratory and the Department of Acoustics from the period from 1974 until now. The list is sorted in chronological order starting with the most recent papers.
acoustics.aau.dk/publications/pubframe.html
George W. Kamperman, INCE Bd. Cert. Emeritus Kamperman Associates, Inc. george@kamperman.com
Richard R. James, INCE E-Coustic Solutions rickjames@e-coustic.com
http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/wp-content/uploads/simple-guidelines-for-siting-wind-turbines-to-prevent-health-risks.pdf
The “How To” Guide to Siting Wind Turbines to Prevent Health Risks from Sound
George W. Kamperman PE and Richard R. James INCE
batr.net/cohoctonwindwatch/08-08-26%20Kamperman-James,%20(WindAction.org)%20Ver.%201.5%20Noise%20Criteria%20for%20Siting%20Wind%20Turbines.pdf
Low Frequency Noise from Large Wind Turbines
Delta Project EFP-06. Client: Danish Energy Authority
www.deltainspire.dk/C1256ED60045E95F/sysOakFil/Lavfrekvens_publ_2/$File/EFP06-LF%20Noise-Evaluation%20of%20audibility%20and%20literature%20study%20AV%201098%2008.pdf
Abstracts
Second International Meeting on Wind Turbine Noise
Lyon, France. September 20-21, 2007
www.wind-watch.org/documents/wp-content/uploads/wtn2007_abstracts.pdf
“Noisy Wind and Hot Air,” Nina Pierpoint, MD, PhD
www.windturbinesyndrome.com/?p=69
(extract) “There need to be funds to cover damages to the health, property values, and quality of life of nearby residents, should these occur.”
Excerpts from the Final Report on the Township of Lincoln Wind Turbine Moratorium Committee
www.aweo.org/windlincoln.html
(extract) “As a result of so many noise complaints, The Moratorium Committee ordered WPS to conduct a noise study. . . . [T]he study established that the turbines added 5-20 dB(A) to the ambient sound. A 10-dB increase is perceived as a doubling of noise level. As soon as the noise study was published in 2001, WPS conceded that these homes were rendered uninhabitable by the noise of the turbines and made buyout offers for the neighboring homes.”
Wind Farm Noise and Regulations in the Eastern United States
Second International Meeting on Wind Turbine Noise
www.wind-watch.org/documents/wind-farm-noise-and-regulations-in-the-eastern-united-states/
Acoustic Trauma: Bioeffects of Sound
Alex Davies BFS Honours
www.dartdorset.org/noise/AlexDavies_AcousticTrauma.pdf
A Review of Published Resarch on Low Frequency Noise and its Effects
Report for Defra by Dr. Geoff Leventhall
www.dartdorset.org/noise/GLlowfreqnoise.pdf
Noise Background
DART (Dorest Against Rural Turbines)
www.dartdorset.org/html/noise.shtml
Project WINDFARMperception
Visual and acoustic impact of wind turbine farms on residents
www.windaction.org/documents/16255
Wind turbines more annoying than expected
www.windaction.org/documents/16245
G.P. van den Berg
Wind turbines at night: acoustical practice and sound research
Science Shop for Physics, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
www.viewsofscotland.org/library/docs/Wind_turbines_at_night_Van_Den_Berg_Mar03.pdf
Effects of the wind profile at night on wind turbine sound
Journal of Sound and Vibration
www.nowap.co.uk/docs/windnoise.pdf
Vibroacoustic Disease
N.A.A. Castelo Branco and M. Alves-Pereira
www.noisefree.org/monitor.pdf
Wind Turbine Acoustic Noise
Renewable Energy Research Laboratory
www.ceere.org/rerl/publications/whitepapers/Wind_Turbine_Acoustic_Noise_Rev2006.pdf
The BPRC Research Nerd
in Brown County, Brown County Ledge Wind, Brown County Invenergy, Invenergy, Noise, Wind farm health effects, Wisconsin public service commission, health effects, wind farm bats, wind farm contract, wind farm health effects, wind farm noise, wind farm noise, wind farm property values, wind farm setback, wind farm shadow flicker, wind farm sleep, wind farm wisconsin, wind siting rules legislation and policy
|
Comments Off
6/30/10 Final Wind Siting Hearing in Madison AND Ramming it through: Is the PSC even listening? AND Brown County Towns asks that more time and care be taken in creating guidelines. Will the PSC's reply be "LOL!" ?
WIND SITING HEARING NOTICE
WEDNESDAY June 30, 2010, beginning at 1:00 p.m and 6:00 p.m.
Docket 1-AC-231
Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
First Floor, Amnicon Falls Room
610 North Whitney Way, Madison, WisconsinAudio and video of the meeting will be broadcast from the PSC Website beginning at 1:00.
CLICK HERE to visit the PSC website, click on the button on the left that says "Live Broadcast". Sometimes the meetings don't begin right on time. The broadcasts begin when the meetings do so keep checking back if you don't hear anything at the appointed start time.
WIND TURBINE DEBATE SPINS TOWARD SEPTEMBER 1 DEADLINE
SOURCE: The Daily Reporter, dailyreporter.com
June 29 2010
By Paul Snyder,
The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin is sticking to a firm Sept. 1 deadline to propose wind turbine placement rules despite calls from local governments to wait.
“We had a very clear mandate to get work done quickly,” PSC Chairman Eric Callisto said Tuesday.
“Expediency is important in order to have uniformity and ground rules in place for future wind development.”
Callisto and other PSC staff members this week are traveling throughout the state to hold public hearings on wind turbine placement draft rules based on recommendations from the state’s Wind Siting Council. The council’s goal is to recommend rules for turbine placement on wind farms that generate less than 100 megawatts of electricity. Wind farms that generate more than 100 megawatts are subject to PSC approval.
The council first met in March, and Callisto said then he expected recommendations by July. The PSC will then use those recommendations to make rules by Sept. 1 for review and approval by state lawmakers.
Still, local governments argue the process is moving too fast.
Representatives from the towns of Morrison, Wrightstown and Glenmore in Brown County last week requested the Wind Siting Council first consider a March report by the World Health Organization relating to health problems caused by wind turbines.
Glen Schwalbach, who submitted the request on behalf of the towns, said further review is more important than a year or two delay in setting the turbine placement rules.
“The fact is: We have newer information now that says there are more health implications than some people have believed relating to noise effects,” said Schwalbach, the town supervisor in Rockland, which neighbors the three towns requesting the review. “It’s not just a case of whining or people imagining things.”
Doug Zweizig, the siting council’s co-chairman, said council members do not know why they have to meet the Sept. 1 deadline. He said he thinks itís a mistake to rush a set of recommendations to the PSC.
Zweizig, a Plan Commission member in the town of Union, said his town took about a year and a half to develop a wind farm ordinance.
“It’s clear that they’re trying to pass something as quickly as possible,” he said. “I think the council could have had a much better process, but it went almost immediately to looking at positions of the various members.”
The majority of the 15-member council, Zweizig said, favors wind development, and members who have experience living on wind farms are not being heard.
Callisto said he wants consensus recommendations but will take the majority’s vote if that’s the best he can get.
“It would hold more weight if it was consensus, but I realize how difficult this is,” he said. “It was not unanimous legislation, either.”
The reason for the Sept. 1 deadline, Callisto said, is so Senate and Assembly committees can review and approve the rules before the legislative session ends. Because the turbine placement recommendations would represent rule changes, they would need to be submitted by Sept. 1 during an election year and only would require approval from legislative committees rather than the full Legislature, Callisto said.
He said he wants the same group of lawmakers that formed the council to review the rule change proposals.
If new wind farm studies come along, Callisto said, and groups such as the Brown County towns want more review, there is room for change.
“I think they’re going to be flexible to accommodate new studies,” he said. “Rules get modified all the time. Nothing’s written in stone.”
NEXT FEATURE
TO: Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Docket No. 1-AC-231 Draft Chapter 128--Wind Energy Systems
Request by the Towns of Morrison, Wrightstown and Glenmore
Brown County, Wisconsin
June 23, 2010
Issue: Request to delay issuing the PSCW wind siting standards until epidemiological studies of health complaints from Wisconsin`s current wind farms are thoroughly completed.
The towns of Morrison, Wrightstown, and Glenmore in Brown County are very concerned about the mounting evidence that there are serious negative impacts on human and animal health caused by wind turbines. It appears it is not only reasonable to delay the issuance of wind siting standards but it would be irresponsible to not do so in light of new studies and ongoing complaints of residents in and near Wisconsin`s existing wind farms.
In general, scientifically and statistically relevant studies have been limited. But, a very important report was published March 2010 by the World Health Organization (WHO) entitled "Night Noise Guidelines for Europe" (available at euro.who.int/en/what-we-publish/abstracts/night-noise-guidelines-for-europe).
The report is based on a six-year evaluation of scientific evidence by thirty-five scientists from medical and acoustical disciplines. WHO indicated that now governments have justifications to regulate noise exposure at night. WHO sets the limit for annual average exposure to not exceed 40 decibels (dB) outside of a residence.
WHO stated, "Recent research clearly links exposure to night noise with harm to health. Sleep disturbance and annoyance are the first effects of night noise and can lead to mental disorders. Just like air pollution and toxic chemicals, noise is an environmental hazard to health". WHO stated that they hope their new report will prompt governments to invest effort and money in protecting health from this growing hazard.
Our towns ask the PSCW to acquire the WHO report and evaluate its application to setting appropriate sound levels for wind turbines.
The PSCW`s draft rules do not address low frequency noise levels. It is not known whether the WHO report addresses this issue but other studies have described the likely effects. This is another area where epidemiological studies are needed before wind turbine setbacks can be reasonably proposed.
Besides sleep disturbance, there are complaints of other physiological problems. It is not acceptable to ignore or minimize the significance of these impacts as just quirks of human imagination.
Also, there is evidence that existing wind farms in Wisconsin are negatively affecting farm animals. Whether it is noise or some other physical phenomena, studies and testing should be done before setting siting standards.
At a public meeting of the Brown County Health Department and the Brown County Human Services Committee, reputable medical and health experts stressed the importance of epidemiological studies to determine the true nature of health impacts of wind turbines.
The State Board of Health pointed out that the lack of funding is a hurdle. But a conviction to do the right thing should prompt the PSCW to make a case to pursue the money issue with state legislators as well as our U.S. senators and representatives. Certainly, our towns would help in this endeavor. That said, it is even more appropriate for the wind developers and their associations to offer funding for independent studies since such studies should reduce future litigation. Electric utilities should have a stake in this effort as well. This is an opportunity to involve the University of Wisconsin research capabilities in both human health and animal health.
It appears that Act 40 does not set a deadline for completing the siting rules. This week a state senator who was one of the leaders in passing the wind siting law agreed that studies should be done to be sure the rules are adequate. If one or two years were used to study the existing wind farms while delaying any new installations, the developers would still have time to help utilities meet their 15% RPS by 2015. Again, if needed, our towns would help in getting the support of legislators.
Our towns implore the PSCW and the Wind Siting Council to not ignore the evidence of potentially serious health impacts and to not set standards until they have done the obvious and reasonable step of studying the health impacts of existing wind turbine installations in Wisconsin. Professional ethics demands no less. We believe our request aligns with the PSCW`s responsibility to protect the citizens of Wisconsin.
Submitted for the towns by Glen R. Schwalbach, P.E.
The BPRC Research Nerd
in Brown County Invenergy, Eric Callisto, Wind developers behaving badly, Wind farm birds, Wind farm health effects, Wisconsin public service commission, psc wind siting council, wind farm bats, wind farm noise, wind farm property values, wind farm shadow flicker, wind siting council, wind siting rules legislation and policy
|
Comments Off