Dennis Hastert

Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, retired

J. Dennis Hastert

759 John St., Ste. A

Yorkville, Illinois 60560

630.553.3628

August 6, 2010

Mr. Larry Gerdes

Transcend Services

One Glenlake Parkway, Ste. 1325

Atlanta, GA 30328

Dear Larry:

It has been brought to my attention that large wind-energy developments are being planned in Bureau, Lee, and Warren counties.  I am aware of developments already in place in eastern Lee County and DeKalb County in northern Illinois.

During my tenure as Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, the House passed through energy bills each designed to use the extensive oil, natural gas, and coal resources that are located here in the United States and to do this with very little government subsidy and/or tax credits.  My feeling was that if we unbridled the free-enterprise system, American capital would be used to develop American energy.  These resources could and would be developed and used in an environmental friendly way while creating American jobs, and meeting America’s energy needs.

As the political tables were turned, Washington under the leadership of President Obama and a Democratic Congress changed America’s energy dependence from use of American resources to a reliance on what are called renewable energy resources.  They basically shut down any new coal and/or nuclear energy development and instead insisted on solar and wind energy.  Wind and solar today furnish less than 2% of our energy needs.  Neither are cost effective when they stand by themselves, but must have government subsidies and tax credits to make them economically feasible.  These costs are born by American taxpayers and energy users.  In addition these solar and wind programs are not feasible unless they have an electric grid system to carry electricity to densely populated areas or user centers.

Wind energy developed in the windy prairie states or solar developed in the desert are generally located a long distance from dense user areas, hence they tend to be non-economic.  The U.S. government, under the direction of President Obama and the Democrat Congress that mandated all energy companies had to produce at least 15% of their energy from renewable sources.  Unfortunately for the northern Illinois area we are one of the few “wind producing” areas that are close enough to an existing electric grid also close to large metropolitan “dense user” areas.

Florida Power and Light, BP and many other large energy producers are scrambling to build wind farms close to the greater Chicago grid because they are being forced to meet the 15% production level in only a few years.

The unintended consequences of this latest big government forced mandate are many.  Are these projects economically feasible or will they ever be?  What are the potential health hazards and what set back provisions should be in place?  What siting provisions have been passed?  Upon the ultimate decommissioning of these projects, will the cost of removal and reclaiming of the land fall on whose shoulders?  The landowners?  The counties that sited the projects? Who?  And finally how long of a productive life is guaranteed by wind farm developers? What’s the possibility of an economic change or a shift in public policy and these projects are abandoned or the renewable energy standards are proven to be impracticable and/or uneconomic?

These questions need to be answered by responsible siting authorities across Illinois.

Dennis Hastert

Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, retired

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

In interviews with 10 families living 1,000 feet to 4,900 feet away from recently built industrial-size wind turbines, a “cluster” of symptoms was revealed: from sleep disturbance, which affected almost everyone, to headache to tinnitus, vertigo, nausea, irritability, memory and concentration problems, and panic episodes. Industrial wind turbines have a total height of 300 feet to 400 feet or more, with blades of 125 feet to 150 feet that sweep 1.5 acres to 2 acres of vertical airspace.

The book includes supportive reviews and notices by several noted physicians in related disciplines. Although primarily directed towards medical professionals, it also is suitable for the lay audience.

The individuals affected by Wind Turbine Syndrome noticed that they developed symptoms after the turbines near their homes started turning. Symptoms were relieved when they left the area and resumed on their return. Eight of the 10 families eventually moved away from their homes because of the severity of the symptoms.

Although not everyone living near turbines is subject to these symptoms, the data Pierpont presents is a concern, considering the current political drive to construct more and ever larger industrial wind turbines close to people’s homes, as well as in the habitats of other equally or more sensitive animals.

Pierpont’s sample size was large enough to show that individuals with pre-existing migraines, motion sensitivity or inner ear damage are particularly vulnerable. People with anxiety or other mental health problems are not particularly susceptible, she says, contradicting the common claim of industry developers that “it’s all in their head.”

“This report is a public health wake-up call that our elected officials and administrators need to take very seriously,” said Eric Rosenbloom, president of National Wind Watch, a clearinghouse for information about the adverse effects of industrial wind energy development.

Pierpont and other health and noise experts agree that at a minimum, large wind turbines should be 2 kilometers (1.25 miles) from any residence, according to an article on the national Wind Watch Web site (www.wind-watch.org/ww-noise-health.php).

According to Pierpont, low-frequency noise or vibration from the wind turbines acts on the balance organs of the inner ear to make the body think it is moving. And this misperception of motion affects other brain functions, including physical reflexes, spatial processing and memory and physiological fear responses (such as pounding heart and nausea).

For more information: www.windturbinesyndrome.com, www.wind-watch.org

Dec. 1, 2009–Wind Turbine Syndrome: Study of Adverse Health Effects Published
Posted on: December 1, 2009
Source: http://audiology.advanceweb.com/Article/Wind-Turbine-Syndrome-Study-of-Adverse-Health-Effects-Published.aspx

Jess Dancer, EdD, is professor emeritus of audiology at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock

Recently I received an e-mail with an attached article on noise pollution and its many effects. My correspondent commented that she had run across articles about possible health problems, including tinnitus, associated with wind turbines and wind farms. “Some of them,” she wrote, “are scary and really make you think twice about the safety of this alternate energy source.”

My curiosity aroused, I downloaded the article on noise pollution entitled, interestingly, “Noise leads birds to unfaithfulness,” authored by Anne Outwater, a columnist for the Tanzania Standard.1

Noise effects on humans are well known, and Outwater’s listing includes hearing loss, tinnitus, insomnia, hypertension, stress, and coronary artery disease. Less known are the effects of noise on animals; Outwater gives us two striking examples:

* “. beached whales are responding to the loud sound of military sonar; they are trying to get away from or they are disoriented by the severe noise. When submarine detectors are on, whales’ songs become longer–they are speaking louder in responses to the noise. Their songs are their language, and they may be warning other whales or searching for food–these tasks of daily living become masked by human introduced noises in the ocean.”
* “On land, birds have been found to sing louder, and less melodiously, when they live in cities. This means that mating songs and danger warnings if unheard by their fellows go unheeded. It decreases the usable habitat. In the case of Zebra Finches, and probably many other species, it is found that they become less faithful to their mates when exposed to traffic noise.”

Wind Turbines

One noise source may produce up to 20 percent of the nation’s electricity by 2030. The source? Wind turbines. Even now, thousands of wind turbines crank out power throughout the country. These massive windmills, up to 80 feet tall, capture the energy in wind and convert it into electricity for residential and commercial use.

According to environmentalist blogger Michelle Bennett, “Wind turbines are a fast efficient way to produce renewable energy. They’re good for the environment, the power grid and local communities. But some residents who live closest to the turbines complain about the noise, and limited data suggests it might be more than a nuisance.”2

The blade tips of a wind turbine can spin at speeds of up to 180 miles per hour in high winds. This rapid spinning produces noise and vibration that contribute to health complaints known collectively as Wind Turbine Syndrome. The syndrome includes headaches, sleep problems, night terrors or learning disabilities in children, tinnitus, irritability, anxiety, concentration and memory problems, disequilibrium, dizziness, and nausea.

Audible sounds from wind turbines have been described by nearby residents as “humming.whooshing.swishing.rumbling of an endless train.thumping.a distant pile driver.” Most concerning are the production of infrasounds, which are below 20 Hz and generally inaudible to the human ear but at intense levels are linked to nausea, imbalance, impaired equilibrium, immobilization, and disorientation.

Most of the information on the purported health effects of wind turbines are anecdotal and/or based on small sample sizes. One larger 2007 questionnaire study carried out by Swedish researchers included 754 subjects living in seven areas in Sweden across dissimililar terrain and different degrees of urbanization.3

Researchers found that the odds of being annoyed by wind turbine noise increased with increasing SPLs [sound pressure levels], rural areas and hilly or rocky terrains. Annoyance was associated with both objective and subjective factors of wind turbine visibility and was further associated with lowered sleep quality and negative emotions. They conclude, “There is a need to take the unique environment into account when planning a new wind farm so that adverse health effects are avoided. The influence of area-related factors should also be considered in future community noise research.”

Further evidence-based research is needed to confirm health problems associated with wind turbines and to devise effective buffer-zone regulations and sound-cancelling technologies. Until then, I say NIMBY!

References

1. Outwater, A. (2009). Noise leads birds to unfaithfulness. Tanzania Standard. Accessed online at http://dailynews.habarileo.co.tz/magazine/?id-9811
2. Bennett, M. (2008). Wind Turbines and. Health? CleanTechnica.com. Accessed online at http://cleantechnica.com-2008/18/wind-turbines-and-health/.
3. Pederson. E, Pearson Waye K. (2007). Wind turbine noise, annoyance and self-reported health and well-being in different living environments. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 64(7): 480-6.

By Jess Dancer, EdD
Posted on: September 1, 2009
Source: http://audiology.advanceweb.com/Article/Wind-Turbine-Syndrome.aspx
Jess Dancer, EdD, is professor emeritus of audiology at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock and can be contacted at jedancer@ualr.edu.

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

Dr. Michael A. Nissenbaum, a radiologist at the Northern Maine Medical Center, conducted interviews with fifteen people living near the wind energy facility in Mars Hill, Maine. His preliminary data suggests the residents are experiencing medical problems (sleep disturbances, headaches, dizziness, weight changes, possible increases in blood pressure, as well as increased prescription medication use) due to noise emissions from the turbines near their homes.

Dr. Nissenbaum presented his preliminary findings before the Maine Medical Association Public Health Committee on March 25, 2009. The full presentation can be downloaded by clicking on the link below.

Brief professional bio for Dr. Nissenbaum:
Education:
Medical School: University of Toronto
Diagnostic Imaging Residency: McGill University
Fellowship Training: University of California

Current position:
Radiologist, Northern Maine Medical Center, Fort Kent, Maine

Previous position:
Junior Faculty at Harvard University and
Associate Director of MRI at a major Harvard teaching hospital

March 25, 2009 by Michael A. Nissenbaum, MD

Windaction.org is grateful to Dr. Nissenbaum for granting us permission to provide his slides via this site.
Download File(s):
Mars Hill Nissenbaum.pdf (2.07 MB)