Here’s the report, which is part of the US Department of Energy (DOE):  http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/tablees1a.html

The numbers below come from the March 2010 column in the first table, “Total Electric Power Industry Summary Statistics,” right on the top of the first page.

Of that total (still measured in units of 1000 megawatthours), here is how many thousand megawatthours came from each of the following sources during March 2010:

Coal:                                            145,198    (about 46.5%)

Nuclear:                                         64,639    (about 20.7%)

Natural Gas:                                    62,882    (about 20.1%)

Hydroelectric:                                  20,574    (about 6.6%)

Wind:                                                8,196     (about 2.6%)

Wood & wood derived fuels:             3,306     (about 1.1%)

Petroleum Liquids                              1,249     (about 0.4%)

Petroleum Coke                                 1,210     (about 0.4%)

Solar                                                       64     (about 0.0%)

(There are a few other minor sources, including biomass, geothermal, etc., each with tiny amounts)

You can see that in March 2010, if you combine both petroleum liquids and petroleum coke (anything used in the USA that is derived from oil), only about eight-tenths of one percent came from those sources…by far the lions share of our electricity comes from coal, with natural gas and nuclear fighting for second/third place, and hydroelectric “in fourth place.”   Wind energy only accounted for 2.6% of our electricity in March 2010.

This means that the arguments that we need wind energy to reduce our dependence on foreign oil are…to put it in a word…ridiculous.  They are not based on anything factual at all.  It represents a smart ploy on the part of the wind industry’s public relations firms, however, to use the general public’s ignorance of where our electricity actually comes from, along with the public’s distaste of relying on oil from foreign countries and fear of terrorist regimes in order to gain public support for wind development by saying we need to use turbines to replace foreign oil.

I noticed that most of the speakers at the Adams County Public Hearing who spoke in favor of wind development in Adams County mentioned our need to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil.  I don’t disagree that it would be good to do that, but the way to do that is ride bicycles instead of drive cars, or buy more electric cars, or find other ways to cut down on burning gasoline in automobiles.

It is amazing, and a little frightening, that so many otherwise intelligent Americans have “bought” this idea about wind energy without giving it any critical thought.  But let us be smarter than that.  One commercial aired on CNN showing military vehicles being blown up by roadside bombs, ending with an appeal to “bring our boys home” and then showing wind turbines as the “answer.”  We can all look forward to the day when, in peace, our troops can return home.  However, just a tiny bit of reasonable thinking reveals that cars use gasoline, which is the real “culprit” behind our dependence on foreign oil–and covering the whole nation with wind turbines will not change the amount of foreign oil we burn in our automobiles.

The statistics above prove that electricity mainly comes from coal, nuclear, and natural gas–all of which are produced domestically and create scores of jobs in the United States–far more than mostly foreign-owned wind companies produce as they win big in our massive give-away of American tax dollars to subsidize wind development.  The “war of words” between wind and oil is a 2.6% producer of electricity (wind) telling the nation that we need wind to replace a 0.8% producer of electricity (oil).

But don’t be too hasty about eliminating that 0.8% producer.  Not all electric generation plants perform the same function on our nation’s grid.  Petroleum products are normally burned in what are called “Peaker Plants.”  Those generate electricity on demand during times of peak electric demand; they have to be ready to fire up quickly to balance the demand on the grid with an equivalent supply.  Wind energy, by contrast, cannot ever serve this function on the grid, because it only offers electricity when the wind blows–not “on demand.”  So, to replace oil burning peaker plants, we need some other form of electricity generation that is “on demand,” and wind is not a candidate for that.

Even if we cover the entire nation with wind turbines, we cannot dismantle even one oil-burning “peaker plant,” unless we’re willing to have all the lights go out when everyone turns on their air conditioners on a hot, still day.  Because wind energy generation is completely dependant on something out of our control–the wind speed–we must have enough electric generating capacity available from other sources–coal, nuclear, or other non-wind sources–to meet 100% of our needs at all times.  That means that wind’s current function on the electric grid is simply to create excess electricity and ”replace” power purchased (not produced) from the other sources on the grid.  The effect of this is to take purchases (money) away from nuclear or coal or other sources, without enabling them to cut down on production–so what do you think that does to the price of electricity from those sources? This excess production of electricity by wind turbines happens on a moment-by-moment basis (whenever the wind blows), eliminating the possibility to plan ahead for even a brief period of time when we could “switch on wind” and “switch off coal.”  Because we cannot depend on wind, we cannot tell an eight hour shift over at the coal-burning plant to stay home, for example–they have to keep their coal burning and be ready to “carry” wind turbines by “switching on” at any moment.  That means that even when we “switch on wind,” we cannot stop burning coal.

It would be a good thing for wind energy to actually help our nation cut back on burning coal someday (although it would eliminate domestic jobs in the coal industry), but first we would need the ability to store the intermittent power that wind turbines produce, and make it something we can control and plan ahead to use.  Unfortunately, we do not have that ability at this time; batteries that would store the amounts of power needed are too expensive and impractical.  Other ideas have been proposed, such as using turbines to pump water from a river below a hydroelectric dam back up into the reservoir, so that we could get “double” use of the same water in hydroelectric generation.  In that scenario, extra water could be released at times of peak electric need, and create more electricity in a predictable way.  Ideas such as this are prohibitively expensive at this time (have you priced hydroelectric dams lately?), and could not make enough of a impact in the total picture, but still deserve further study as a possible useful role for wind turbines.  If this is a future possibility, more turbines should be built near hydroelectric dams, and not 1000 feet from people’s homes in rural America.

I hope Americans stop to think just a little bit before we wreck every scenic vista in the nation, destabilize our electric grid, raise the cost of our own electricity, and give mostly foreign companies huge American tax subsidies over a terribly expensive and half-baked idea, all because we believed the wind companies commercials that told us we could eliminate our dependence on foreign oil while driving our cars around under 400 foot wind turbines.

A Concerned Citizen

Wind energy is blowing hot right now. Nationwide, wind farms are bringing in renewable energy and jobs, such as in Montana, as detailed in “Propelling Growth.” Overall, wind turbines in the United States generated 52 billion kilowatt hours in 2008, which is enough to serve 4.6 million households, according to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). And demand is growing: The number of wind turbines in the U.S. nearly doubled between 2006 and 2008, according to the DOE.

But it isn’t all good, according to Dr. Nina Pierpont, who has studied families living near wind turbines. Pierpont found that there are enough negative effects to warrant calling them “Wind Turbine Syndrome,” because the symptoms form a consistent pattern from person to person, she says. “A syndrome really means the description of signs and symptoms that occur together and are not yet tied together as a clear disease.”

One resident of Mars Hill, Maine, which has hosted a wind farm since 2007, wrote to Pierpont about her experience: “The noise created by the turbines can be unbearable at times,” says Wendy Todd. “It causes disruption to sleep patterns, stress and anxiety to most who live downwind of the project. For some it causes headaches, pressure or ringing in the ears, inability to concentrate, feelings of unease, and dizziness. … I am not talking about a simple nuisance, this is about life-altering changes to the environment that can literally make people sick and change the way you live in your home and use your land. A large number of the families affected have considered leaving their homes.”

In his testimony to the Michigan Public Service Commission in December 2009, Dr. Malcolm A. Swinbanks said low-frequency noise can induce feelings likened to seasickness. “Like seasickness, the sensitivity of different individuals varies enormously,” he says, “some being immediately sensitive, while others can barely detect anything.” Swinbanks says he stood beside two people in a place where low-frequency noise was present; one person couldn’t really hear anything, while the other felt ill and wanted to leave.

Pierpont’s research also finds similar inconsistencies. Further, some of her subjects note that their symptoms come and go according to the wind’s direction and strength, blade spinning speed, which way the turbines are facing and particular sounds coming from the turbines. Ultimately, Pierpont says, low-frequency noise or vibration tricks the body’s balance system into thinking it’s moving-like seasickness, as Swinbanks suggested.

Wind turbine companies have dismissed the problem, saying people are simply making the symptoms up because they just don’t like the turbines. According to a February 2009 article in Ontario, Canada’s The Windsor Star, Brian Howe, a consulting engineer in acoustics for HGC Engineering, said Ontario’s guidelines for turbine noise are adequate and consistent with Health Canada studies, and that most people near wind turbines aren’t complaining about the noise.

But Tracy Whitworth, a teacher in Clear Creek, Ontario, has multiple complaints: Her home sits among 18 turbines, all within a 1.8-mile radius and the closest about one-quarter mile from her back door. “What most don’t understand is that it is the low frequency waves you cannot hear that are so debilitating to one’s health,” she says. “I have developed tinnitus in my ears. I hear and feel the pulsating of the turbines and buzzing in my ears. I also feel the pulsating in my throat and chest. I have nausea, dizziness, significant hearing loss, itchy eyes … heart palpitations, achy joints, short-term memory loss, severe sleep deprivation on a regular basis.”

The solution to the problem, say medical experts, isn’t to stop harnessing wind’s energy, but to place the turbines a certain distance away from where people live. In flat terrain, the turbines should be placed at least 1.25 miles away from where people are located, according to Pierpont, and at least 2 miles away in mountainous terrain, where the turbines are usually on ridges.

This distance from wind farms that residents should maintain, Pierpont says, is probably the most important thing for people to know. “When the wind farms are coming to their communities, they need to know what kinds of distances to ask for,” she says. “I think government should be involved in having proper setbacks in place, because that’s always a governmental issue whether local or state, and in funding further research.”

By Jessica B. Mulholland | March 2010
Web Source: http://www.governing.com/article/are-wind-farms-health-risk

» Translations available on the toolbar at the bottom «

DeKalb residents who have been battling with wind turbine companies since 2003 said their presentation was to educate the citizens on the adverse effects they’ve personally experienced. The group has continued their efforts since the turbines went online in December and are seeking litigation.

“It sounds like a 747 parked in your backyard,” rural Shabbona resident Mel Hass said about the sound of the turbines.

Another rural Shabbona resident, Mary Murphy, explained the sound at night like a dryer with a shoe in it, right outside her bedroom.

Hinshaw & Culbertson Attorney Rich Porter who opened the informational meeting with a presentation called, “Don’t Get Blown Over By a Wind Farm,” said a study has compared the noise to a leaky faucet in the middle of the night.

Though the panel of DeKalb County residents admit some of their complaints don’t occur around the clock, they said problems are affecting their everyday lives.

Others like rural Waterman resident Ron Flex said the turbines have made he and his family physically ill since being turned on. Flex said his wife became nauseous the first day they were turned on. Something he attributes to the shadow flicker from the rotating of the propellers.

Shadow flicker occurs when the sun is at an angle to produce a large shadow from the propeller of a wind turbine as it rotates around. The repetition of the shadow fading in and out is considered an annoyance.

Noise seemed to be an overwhelming complaint from each of the speakers.

Porter said that even though no noise seems present when standing below one, the turbines create a noise short distances away and can sometimes be amplified when inside a home.

Also included in the list of complaints with the turbines are lower property values, speculation about tax revenue, the inability to negotiate the contracts with the companies, and negative effects on livestock and other wildlife.

Porter urged local officials to adopt special use ordinances that deal specifically with wind turbines.

“You should be doing something about your ordinances,” he said. “There are a variety of developers circling your county.”

Speakers also urged attendees to educate themselves whether they were considering allowing the turbines on their properties.

Porter warned the crowd to be very skeptical of what they hear about tax revenue being a major benefit for schools. Taxation for the turbines as currently exists expires in 2011 and he warned there is always the possibility of them becoming tax exempt because of their portrayal as green technology.

Speaker and DeKalb County resident Tammy Duriavich added that people need to stop labeling areas with turbines as wind farms and view them as industrial.

“If you can’t plant it, harvest it, breed it…it’s not farming,” she said.

Duriavich explained the group doesn’t oppose renewable energy, but said she believes the turbines are not a good example of efficient green technology because of how much land they take out of crop production and for various other reasons.

“We’re not against renewable energy,” she said. “We just think it could be done responsibly.”

Several elected officials from the area were present to hear what they had to say.

Attempts by Brad Lila, of Renewable Energy Sources in Ashton, to point out differences between the companies were cut short. Presenters claimed the audience was there to hear the other side of the story.

For the complete article see the 03-10-2010 issue.

Credit: Ashton Gazette, www.ashtongazette.com 12 March 2010

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.

Source: http://www.djreprints.com
MARCH 1, 2010, 6:44 P.M. ET

Video:

JOSEPHINE CAFAGNA, PRESENTER: It’s the biggest wind farm operating in Victoria and it’s putting the tiny town of Waubra on the map in ways the locals never predicted. It’s been dubbed the ‘Waubra Disease’, the health effects of living surrounded by wind turbines and it’s now becoming known around the world. As the State Government approves more wind farms, there are growing demands for serious investigation and for standards to be reviewed. Cheryl Hall reports.

DONALD THOMAS, WAUBRA FARMER: I thought it was probably the greatest thing to ever happen to the area. Visited wind farm up at Ararat and was quite impressed and came home thinking well, yeah, it’s a good thing. It’s not until the windmills started turning that we started to experience a few problems.

CHERYL HALL, REPORTER: And what sort of problems have you had?

DONALD THOMAS: We’ve had troubles, ear pressure, headaches, rapid heartbeat, high blood pressure.

CHERYL HALL: 20 families living around Waubra’s wind turbines have reported similar symptoms, but not everyone can talk about it. Those with turbines on their properties have signed agreements not to speak publicly.

DONALD THOMAS: In the yard here you can feel the ones on the hill there. They get into sync and every minute or two you’ll get this – there may be three or four big whooshes that you can actually feel.

CHERYL HALL: The most high-profile case of so-called “Waubra Disease” was Trish Godfrey, who spoke to Stateline last year.

TRISH GODFREY, WAUBRA RESIDENT (Sept. 2009): Basically, the best way I can describe it is that you feel that you’ve got motion sickness, but it’s not just for a little while, it’s all the time in varying degrees. It feels like my head is in a vice. I can’t remember the last night that I had a full night’s sleep. Usually we wake up at least five or six times during the night.

CHERYL HALL: Last week she won her battle when the wind farm company Acciona bought her property, but it came at a price.

Trish and Victor Godfrey have signed a confidentiality agreement and can’t speak publicly, but the company Acciona has issued a statement denying they suffered health effects from the turbines.

BRETT THOMAS, ACCIONA: No, that certainly wasn’t the issue that they contacted us about. As I said, their concern when they contacted us was about the visual impacts.

CATHY RUSSELL, WESTERN PLAINS LANDSCAPE GUARDIANS: Absolutely ridiculous, because we all know, and as well as the media knows, as well as the greater community who reads the papers knows, Trish was very much suffering. And there’s no question of a doubt it would open the floodgates effectively with regards to liability.

CHERYL HALL: Just down the road from Donald Thomas’s house this property is deserted. The Deans haven’t lived here for 10 months.

NOEL DEAN, WAUBRA FARMER: I won’t go out there while the turbines are there. I can’t afford to. I just get too ill.

CHERYL HALL: Noel Dean has moved to Ballarat. His son works on the farm but won’t live there.

NOEL DEAN: It’s cost us approximately $400,000, of buying this shed, relocating and expenses occurred in the monitoring and investigation of the problem, which the wind farm won’t do. I’ve asked compliance from the State Government for at least six months and they won’t give any confirmation that they’ve complied with their duty.

BRETT THOMAS: We’re carrying out all of the compliance obligations that we are required to carry out at that wind farm.

CHERYL HALL: The responsibility of enforcing the permit conditions has been transferred from the Planning Minister Justin Madden to the local council. But the Pyrenees Shire Council has been unable to do its job. It says it has neither the technical skills or the financial resources to enforce the conditions. The council has received many complaints and wants the State Government to investigate them.

DAVID CLARK, PYRENEES SHIRE MAYOR: I honestly don’t know, and again all the official evidence says that no, there isn’t an impact. My personal view is very simple. My personal view is I’ve known these people all my life and a lot of them I’ve gone to school with and I trust ‘em with my life. And they’re saying to me they’ve got an issue and to me that issue needs to be investigated.

CHERYL HALL: The Planning Minister Justin Madden declined a request for an interview, but he issued a statement saying complaints regarding noise levels at the Waubra wind farm have been investigated and no breach of the conditions has been found. The Health Department says it has reviewed current research and believes there is no direct evidence that wind farms cause health problems. The Clean Energy Council agrees.

MATTHEW WARREN, CLEAN ENERGY COUNCIL: The issue of infrasound comes up in these debate, but after 20 years of wind farm development round the world and 100,000 turbines erected and studied around the world, there is no medical evidence of infrasound causing illness.

CHERYL HALL: Noel Dean has commissioned an independent report on noise levels at his property.

NOEL DEAN: I’m waiting for an independent, peer-reviewed report which at the moment indicates that there’s non-compliance at our property several times over 10 days. There is pulsing of low frequency, highly suspected of causing the illnesses we are getting.

CHERYL HALL: The report will be presented to a court case in New Zealand next week to demonstrate widespread complaints about health effects. It will include information on Waubra as well as complaints from 750 people who live near a wind farm in Makara in New Zealand.

CATHY RUSSELL: I’ve got information effectively from Makara Windfarm in New Zealand, the affidavits from the people who live near that particular wind farm, and similarly, questionnaires of a similar nature with regard to health from Waubra that back up – the same people in the same situations.

CHERYL HALL: Donald Thomas fears his problems are about to get worse. There are plans to make the Waubra wind farm even bigger, with more turbines to the north.

DONALD THOMAS: There’s no way known we can allow Waubra north to go ahead, having lived next to the biggest wind farm in the Southern Hemisphere.

CHERYL HALL: But the Waubra wind farm will be dwarfed by the Stockyard Hill proposal, west of Ballarat, of more than 200 turbines. Like Waubra, the communities of Beaufort and Skipton are divided over the wind farm. 300 public submissions have been received about the plan.

CASSIE FRANZOSE, WESTERN PLAINS LANDSCAPE GUARDIANS: The lack of information, the refusal to have a public meeting. There is no chance that this will not be approved. I mean, it is an absolute given. This process is – absolutely favours the deployment and widespread deployment of inappropriate wind farms across Victoria.

CHERYL HALL: Victoria currently has 10 operating wind farms, but another 27 are under development. One of those at Bald Hills in Gippsland was this week granted approval by Planning Minister Justin Madden to increase the height of its turbines by 20 per cent to 135 metres.

CATHY RUSSELL: It’s like a new frontier, effectively, because turbines, when the noise standards were set for example, were based on turbines that were around 36 metres high and now they’re 136 metres high and reaching into parts of the atmosphere never chartered before.

CHERYL HALL: But Environment Minister Peter Garrett laid the responsibility firmly with the State Government.

PETER GARRETT, FEDERAL ENVIRONMENT MINISTER: Wind farms, there are a broader range of issues, sitting issues, amenity issues, noise issues and the like, and I certainly think that it’s important that they are taken into account by local authorities and state governments in any of the states of the Commonwealth when they’re actually approving wind farms.

CHERYL HALL: Cathy Russell and Noel Dean met with Peter Garrett last night. They asked him to take their health issues seriously and fund an independent investigation.

CATHY RUSSELL: We’ve told them repeatedly, and so ultimately, he’s ignoring that advice at his peril, as he has done with insulation and solar. It’s just a minefield and it’s a time bomb waiting to happen, especially with the deployment of so many of these things throughout western Victoria.

Source: Stateline Victoria
Published: Friday, February 19, 2010 8:34 AEDT

I am writing in response to the lead story in the April 16 edition of the Telegraph titled “Turbines divide neighbors.” These wind companies still have everyone fooled. That wind farm will not produce an average 226 megawatts. As I stated in a previous letter, the average output will be about 50 megawatts. It will not power 55,000 homes.

The article states very few people would talk. There’s a reason for that. Once a landowner signs a lease to have a windmill, they can talk about it only to family members, a lawyer, or other landowners involved with the same company.

They forfeit the right to complain if there is an unforeseen problem. Neighbors who sign up for money are legally silenced, too.

What do the windmill companies have to hide? Why would they take away your due process if these things are so great? Would you have someone work on your house who gave you a contract like this to sign? If they are so great, then why did Renewable Energy Systems start having small meetings at a private residence?

By having small, personally invited groups, the windmill companies must feel they won’t be questioned by people who have done their research and won’t be asked the tough questions that come up in a more public forum. To meet this 25 percent renewable energy resource, it will take thousands and thousands of windmills. Apparently our Lee County Board wants all of these windmills in our county by making it so easy for these wind companies to come in and set up.

The zoning board won’t let a landowner sell off 1 acre from a farm to a family member to build a house because they don’t want prime farmland taken out of production, but this same board has no problem letting a wind company put three or four windmills on this same farm, taking up as much or more land with the turbine site and access roads as a 1-acre home site.

When will it end? When every parcel of land in rural Lee County is blanketed with windmills?

This is an excerpt from an RES brochure: “Usually, sites are located in high wind areas on larger parcels of undeveloped land.” Is Lee or DeKalb county a high wind area with undeveloped land? Then why are they allowed to come in so easily and disrupt people’s lives?

Neil Miller
Ashton

saukvalley.com

23 April 2009

Planning and Zoning Director Paul Miller has determined that on Monday, May 11, beginning at 9 a.m. at Northern Illinois University, a public hearing is to be held related to the Florida Power & Light wind farm proposal amendments. There is nothing “public” about this public hearing.

Taxpayers are forced to choose between earning a livelihood or attending the hearing. This is another example of county officials deliberately designing the public hearing process to place all burdens on the taxpayers while providing undue advantage to FPL. It is neither fair nor reasonable for DeKalb County officials to use such a financial weapon against the citizens.

To further make attendance unpalatable, the public hearing location is the Carl Sandburg Auditorium in the Holmes Student Center at NIU. County residents will be subjected to distant parking, parking fees, long walks and a less-than-impartial setting.

The standard public hearing time in DeKalb County is 7:30 p.m. In fact, DeKalb County has held public hearings in various townships at 7:30 p.m. Why do our county officials insist on a work-day, marathon wind farm hearing? The obvious answer is to prevent the public from attending, and therefore rationalize their biased vote favoring FPL’s special-use permit. Other counties appear more willing to accommodate their citizens. McLean, Livingston and Logan counties in Illinois held wind farm hearings over three, five and more evenings.

This wind farm hearing process is a flagrant violation of our rights as DeKalb County taxpayers and most especially for those forced to endure a lifetime of living within the shadow of 133 industrial wind turbines, which are 400 feet tall. The Holmes Student Center, with its 16 floors, has dominated the county skyline but will now be dwarfed by these 40-story towering turbines.

The taxpayers and residents of Afton, Clinton, Milan and Shabbona townships deserve to have the public hearing(s) held in our townships at a time when we are able to attend. A series of meetings held in each township at 7:30 p.m. would allow this process to be conducted in a reasonable and fair manner as is the right of the citizens of this county. Our county officials have yet to provide a fair and reasonable hearing process concerning the FPL application.

Sherry Hellmuth
Afton Township

Daily Chronicle

21 April 2009

The wind power debate

It took me by surprise when I saw a reply to my question on Mail Bag on Sunday, April 6, 2009 regarding industrial wind turbines. In DeKalb County, IL, the situation is different because of the following:

1. This is not west Texas which is sparcely populated with few people per square mile. DeKalb County has many rural and rural/residential properties. In Feb., 2009, we counted about 107 rural/residential properties (less than 10 acres) in Shabbona Township (DeKalb Co.) alone. Many of these properties were originally purchased from farmers who profited by selling a few acres with old buildings they had no use for. After remodeling, these are now much more valuable properties, paying high real estate taxes.

2. In DeKalb County, 1/3 of the proposed industrial wind turbines are located on property owned by absentee landlords. 30 of the turbines are located on land owned by people from outside the United States (Germany, Italy and Venezuela).

3. As wind complexes develop, it is becoming clear that wind energy has many drawbacks. Research states that wind energy is about 20% efficient. Were it not for large federal and state tax subsidies, we would not have industrial wind turbines complexes. There are many health and safety issues (see www.nowindfarms.com) such as noise, ice fling, low level vibrations, lightening strikes, turbine collapse and/or blade malfunction, fire, not to mention bird and bat kills. The public should be appraised of the true monetary cost of wind energy.

4. The property value of homes in the footprint of an industrial wind turbine complex is reduced at least 25% to 30% according to Michael McCann, Certified Appraiser, specializing in wind farms. Mary Wells, Community Outreach Manager for Florida Power and Light Energy said to me on April 1, 2009 that there is “no evidence that property values are reduced.” After Ms. Wells admitted that there is little population density in west Texas where there are numerous turbines, it became obvious that FPL uses arbitrary figures of dissimilar properties. John, if you were not making money from an industrial wind turbine, would you want a 40 story turbine, 1400 feet from your home creating noise, shadow flicker, vibration etc.?

5. Most importantly, in DeKalb County our A-1 agricultural zoning prohibits the construction of anything that dominates the landscape.

Thank you for your time.

As a devoted listener of US Farm Report, sincerely,

Mark Johnson

agweb.com

9 April 2009

D’Entremont blames the turbines for sending low-frequency sound into his old house, located about 400 metres from the nearest turbine.

Family says turbine vibrations made them ill enough to move

Giant wind turbines spin next to Daniel d’Entremont’s home in a tiny rural community in southwestern Nova Scotia.

The large house in Lower West Pubnico is now empty and abandoned, d’Entremont says, because inaudible sound from the 17-turbine wind farm made his family sick.

“The noise is unbearable,” he says from Abrams River, the nearby community he recently relocated to with his wife and four of his six children.

“It’s like a surround sound — you can’t avoid it, you can’t ignore it. It just comes right into your head.”

D’Entremont blames the turbines for sending low-frequency sound into his old house, located about 400 metres from the nearest turbine.

He says his family couldn’t sleep, his children were constantly tired and suffering headaches, and nobody in the house could concentrate.

The d’Entremont family’s complaints touch on a little-known — and little-studied — debate over whether inaudible sounds from wind farms can cause health problems for residents living nearby.

While the operator of the wind farm brushes off the family’s claims, experts say vibrations from the turbines embedded deep into the ground have the potential to affect the health of some.

And new sound testing commissioned by the federal government hopes to offer more insight into what, if anything, is happening at d’Entremont’s home.

The Lower West Pubnico wind farm was fully operational in May 2005, and it wasn’t long before d’Entremont’s family starting feeling ill.

D’Entremont says complaints to politicians and to the wind farm’s owner were largely ignored, but several area naturopaths told him to relocate.

He finally moved in February after receiving the same advice from a U.S. pediatrician who has studied the effects of wind turbines on children.

“Around wind turbines, it appears there are always some people who are very disturbed by them,” Dr. Nina Pierpont says from her office in Malone, N.Y.
“It’s not everybody, so it creates a lot of controversy.

“When the exposure is inside a house, occurring 24 hours a day, even if the sound intensity is less, there is potential to produce serious pathology.”

Charles Demond, president of Pubnico Point Wind Farm Inc., says Pierpont has never visited the site.
He says the wind farm was built according to local zoning bylaws, which determine how close turbines can be to houses, and that sound tests concluded the noise levels weren’t harmful.
“Here’s someone claiming that his world is changing, but those comments don’t add up,” says Demond. “The sound testing indicated that the noise level from that wind farm is not outside any guidelines.”

Ottawa and several provinces across Canada have started to promote and foster wind energy projects.

Last year’s federal budget quadrupled the Wind Power Production Incentive, which provides funding for wind farms, and the plan is to invest at least $920 million in promoting wind power over the next 15 years.

But the growth is occurring in a largely unregulated environment.

Ontario, one of the only provinces with any regulations governing wind farms, requires a noise-impact assessment for areas up to 1,000 metres from the wind turbine.

In Pincher Creek, Alta., home of one of the largest wind farms in Canada, turbines must be set back at a distance four times their height.
In Lower West Pubnico, it’s only twice the height of the turbines.

Noise standards also differ, and none exist to regulate levels of low-frequency sound.

A report by a Halifax audio specialist measured the loudest sounds on d’Entremont’s property from the Lower West Pubnico wind farm at 50.32 decibels — roughly the intensity of a human voice nearby — below the recommended level of 55 decibels.

But Demond concedes previous tests could not rule out any effects from low-frequency noise.

“To be totally fair, what he concluded is that he didn’t have the equipment necessary to go to those sub-frequency levels to unequivocally walk away with a concrete answer,” says Demond.

That reveals a fundamental problem with the way wind farm noise is measured, making it almost impossible to know whether wind farms are causing health problems, audio experts say.

Gordon Whitehead, an audiologist who retired last month from a 21-year career at Dalhousie University in Halifax, insists low-frequency noise can affect the health of some people.

He says such inaudible vibrations — the same kind of vibrations that music fans can feel in their bodies at a loud rock concert — can lead to symptoms including loss of balance and blurred vision.

“There’s a lot of research out of the U.S. about killing large animals by hitting them with very large, very loud low-frequency sound — literally stopping the heart,” says Whitehead.

“A wind farm doesn’t produce sounds loud enough to do that, but the point is if you’re in a situation where the land around you is very dense, then some people who are very sensitive to that are going to pick that up.”

Whitehead says noise regulations only deal with sounds that humans can hear, so tests rarely focus on the low-frequency sounds in question.

“I’m in favour of wind farms, but in analysing them you have to make certain that you’re not creating a problem — and I don’t know if they are.”

The complaints from the d’Entremont family have prompted the federal Natural Resources Department to order new noise testing, which will measure the low-frequency sound in Lower West Pubnico.

“I think there is some debate about whether there is impact from low-frequency noise,” says Denis Zborowski, manager of the federal Wind Power Production Incentive program. “Normally it isn’t covered because it’s not audible.”

Zborowski says without Canadian standards, the new study, expected to be released this summer, will rely on international standards and current research to draw conclusions.

Michael Sharpe, another Dalhousie University audiologist, says even if someone isn’t affected directly by low-frequency noise, the constant swoosh of the blades, even at allowable levels, can have psychological effects.

“If the sound is audible and it annoys you, then it can seem louder,” says Sharpe, who compares it to a dripping tap that can keep someone awake at night.

“As your stress level increases, your awareness of the annoying sound increases as well. As we know, elevated stress levels for a prolonged period of time can have a negative health effect.”

Web link: http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/NASApp/cs/Content…

These effects arise not only from audible noise frequencies but also from persistent inaudible low frequency noise waves of a cyclical nature which are felt, but not heard. There are a growing number of scientific observations and studies suggesting that people living up to 2 miles away from these industrial wind farms may be affected.

Many European nations with more than two decades of experience with industrial wind factories have now implemented regulations stipulating setbacks of 1-1.5 miles.

Health concerns and the need for careful siting of wind turbines

Download File(s):
NMMC_Medical_Staff_Statement.pdf (84.84 kB)

I have a few thoughts I’d like to share with you about the
wind farm project since some of the proposed turbines are
about a half mile from my residence and I have concerns that
have not been adequately addressed by the limited information
that has been made public.

- Why has this project been kept so quiet? I would have
expected major information sharing, over months or even years,
for something this big. The short public notice that was given
immediately makes me suspicious that something is being hidden
about this project.

- Just how does the power company propose to guarantee no
loss of property value? They have not made any effort to
contact me in this regard, but the Midweek reported there
would be such a guarantee. When will I be informed about this
guarantee?

- What happened to the idea that the county board was trying to
preserve the agricultural character of the county? If all
these little portions of the county are changed to industrial,
there are sure to be other property owners, especially those
with areas that are totally surrounded by the new zoning,
who will no doubt want industrial zoning too.

- How are agricultural activities affected? Do the pilots
who fly crop dusters have any input? What about the farmers
who want to hire them?

- Is this project really worth the loss of farmland? Some
of the best crop land on the planet is in this area. There
will be a loss of farmland due to this project. After
seeing the land losses in DuPage and Kane counties over the
last three decades, how can any additional losses be
condoned? Surely there are areas without such prime farmland
that can be used for this type of project.

- If it happens to these townships, how can it be stopped
elsewhere in the county? The precedent for such changes
would be established and difficult to prevent in other areas.

- How is public safety affected? There are multiple examples
of turbines catching fire or exploding. Are any fire departments
in the county prepared to handle these instances? And what
about the problems these turbines might present to Lifeline
helicopter access? On Wednesday morning, 2/25, a helicopter
was brought in for an accident at Willrett and Fairview. While
this one incident is outside the proposed area, there have
been cases in the past where Lifeline was called in for
accidents within the proposed area.

- What are the real quality of life changes that I could see?
How will these changes affect my enjoyment of living in
the country? I wanted to live here to get away from noise,
will this suddenly change? Again, the lack of information
sharing makes it seem like something is being hidden from
the public.

- Finally, what about basic fairness? The majority of the
proposed industrial parcels are owned by people who don’t live
anywhere near them. It seems to me that the only people who
should have any real say in this decision are those who live in,
or adjacent to, the affected townships.

If you are still reading at this point, thanks for seeing it
through to the end. And please keep these concerns in mind
while you are making up your mind on this issue.

Sincerely,

David

In the Feb. 5 Lee County Zoning Board of Appeals meeting (the minutes are available to the public online at www.county oflee.org, on page 11.), Mr. Ortgiesen (a private citizen) voiced his concern about the efficiency of wind energy versus nuclear power. Mr. Pedroni of FPL Energy Wind Illinois states “the energy produced at the proposed Lee-DeKalb wind energy center (226 megawatts) will be equivalent to more than one-third of the energy produced by one of the petitioner’s nuclear plants.”

This is absolutely not true. The facility at Byron (www.exeloncorp.com) is fairly typical of nuclear plants in Illinois with an average output of 2,300 megawatts. This 226-megawatt wind farm will actually only average about 45-55 megawatts. This is about 2-3 percent of Byron’s output, not the “more than one third” that Mr. Pedroni claims.

A wind turbine’s power output is not proportional to the wind speed that powers it. A typical wind turbine’s maximum power rating is produced at a wind speed of 25-28 mph. The average wind speed of the proposed wind farms in this area is 12 mph. (www.awea.org). At this wind speed, the wind farm will only produce about 20-25 percent of that maximum power rating. A typical wind turbine power curve graph is available at www.gepower.com. As you can see, it would take about 2,000 wind turbines to equal the “more than one-third of a nuclear plant’s output,” not the 150 as Mr. Pedroni claims. I am not advocating nuclear power, I am using it as a comparison because that’s what was brought up at the zoning meeting. I am making two points here.

These wind farms do not produce as much power as the public is led to believe. At an average wind speed of under 20 mph, wind turbines are grossly inefficient. These wind farms are much better suited to areas with a much higher average wind speed than here in northern Illinois, and I think we are much better served to gain this 2 percent by electric conservation.

And secondly, apparently whatever these wind company’s say is taken as the gospel truth without challenge. Why?

Neil Miller

Ashton

Daily Chronicle

10 March 2009

Wind turbine collapses, sparks fire – No injuries; cause under investigation

ALTONA — Area residents were startled Friday morning when they heard what sounded like explosions at Noble Environmental Power wind park here.

“It (the noise) was so consistent and lasted so long I thought it was a thunderstorm way off in the distance,” said Bernie Bullis, who lives about four miles away.

He had stopped at his home to pick up paperwork for work when the rumbling started.

“Then, I thought it might be an earthquake.”

Either way, he said, it was surprising and unusual.

The repetitive booming noise, which lasted a few minutes, wasn’t caused by the weather — it was a massive turbine collapsing to the ground off Fisher Way.

Noble officials said the 9:45 a.m. collapse then sparked a small fire at the base of the turbine.

No one was injured.

Neighbors could see thick smoke billowing at the rural wind park as Altona and Ellenburg Depot crews arrived to extinguish the blaze.

“I looked out and saw all the black smoke so I knew something was going on, but I never heard it (fall),” said Joanne Perry, who lives on Rand Hill Road.

The entire Altona wind park was shut down after the accident, but officials said no danger was posed to the public.

After two years of construction, dozens of turbines are scattered across the Northern Tier. There are about 270 turbines between the various projects in Clinton and Franklin counties.

It can take weeks to construct and energize a single turbine, which at full height stands about 392 feet tall.

The Altona project alone has cost more than $200 million.

Friday’s collapse was the first major problem reported at any of the area wind parks, which are insured.

It was unclear Friday what caused the collapse.

Noble officials are continuing to investigate and refused to release any additional information or say whether the collapse caused any other damage.

In a news release, Noble Environmental CEO Walt Howard said: “Noble values the safety of its employees and neighbors above all else. Noble has committed its full resources to understanding the cause of this incident.”

Local firefighters referred all comments to Noble.

Altona Town Supervisor Larry Ross did not return Press-Republican messages seeking comment on the collapse.

Published March 06, 2009 10:24 pm
By ANDREA VanVALKENBURG

Staff Writer

E-mail Andrea VanValkenburg at: avanvalkenburg@pressrepublican.com

Web Link: http://www.pressrepublican.com/archivesearch/local_story_065222420.html

Residents shocked by wind-turbine collapse

ALTONA — Many residents were shocked that a massive wind turbine could come tumbling down and officials say it could take months to learn why one collapsed Friday.

Mike Fellion flew over the wreckage Saturday morning and was amazed to see that pieces of the structure appeared to have been thrown “about a quarter-mile away.”

“I was surprised,” said Fellion, who flew above the wreckage with his father, Victor, a volunteer pilot who runs the Wings of Life program, which provides emergency medical flights for ailing residents.

“I’m just hoping that this was an isolated incident.”

Neighbors around the Altona wind park reported hearing loud explosions before the turbine apparently snapped in half around 10 a.m. and then caught fire.

Helen Morales, who lives near the fallen Fisher Way turbine, didn’t hear anything, but earlier saw the blades on one turbine “spinning at a high rate of speed” and noted that the air appeared “cloudy” around it.

She doesn’t know if the faster-moving blades were attached to the affected turbine, but wonders if her observations were connected to Friday’s collapse, which was the first major incident at the Norther Tier wind parks.

Though the push for wind energy has received strong support from many local residents, others, like members of the West Beekmantown Neighborhood Association, feel they pose a danger to public safety and health and have resisted the efforts.

There are zoning regulations in place that restrict how close turbines can be erected near homes, but some wondered Saturday if similar collapses could happen and whether flying debris could extend beyond the protected perimeter.

As word of the collapse spread Friday, Adirondack Council spokesman John Sheehan expressed concern about the risks turbines could pose on elevated and sloped locations if a collapse could happen in flatland parks.

The Altona wind park will remain closed as the investigation continues.

In their latest update, Noble Environmental Power officials said it could take several months to finalize their investigation, which is being conducted jointly with General Electric.

Noble CEO Walt Howard toured the site after the collapse and spoke with employees there.

In a news release, he said: “I am pleased with the quick response of the Noble team. They secured the site and accounted for all Noble employees in a manner that is consistent with our stringent safety policy. I am also grateful to the fire department for its swift response.”

Officials said the wind park utilizes General Electric 1.5 megawatt turbines. There are currently more than 12,000 of those turbines across the world and they are the most widely deployed turbines, Noble said.

Altona Town Supervisor Larry Ross was also surprised by the collapse and said he will be updated on the investigation as it progresses.

“They’re going to keep me in the loop so I know what’s going on,” he said from his home Saturday.

“The main thing was that no one was hurt “¦ and now it’s a matter of finding out what happened and putting it back together.”

Published March 07, 2009 09:34 pm

By ANDREA VanVALKENBURG
Staff Writer

E-mail Andrea VanValkenburg at: avanvalkenburg@pressrepublican.com

Web Link:  http://www.pressrepublican.com/archivesearch/local_story_066213456.html