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

Martin Alder, managing director of Longhill Energy, said: “At this time of year the sun hits the blades of the turbine at a certain angle and creates flickering shadows over parts of the prison.

“Some of the prisoners complained that the flickering was irritating them. We’ve discussed the problem with the prison authorities and agreed to turn the turbine off for a few hours in the early morning until about 9am. The problem only occurs at certain times of the year when the sun is low. I suppose the bottom line is that it’s a matter of security.”

Mr Alder said that his company hoped eventually to install equipment to stop the turbine automatically when the sun was at the problem angle.

He said: “Shadow-flicker is a recognised problem with wind turbines. That’s why they aren’t built near housing developments. And we want to be good neighbours.”

A Home Office spokeswoman said: “The Prison Service is reaching an agreement whereby the wind turbine does not interfere with the smooth running of the prison.”

From The Times
April 9, 2005
By Richard Ford
Web Link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article379096.ece

» 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

Video: 3-3-2010

Note that on some of clips there is a background rumbling noise that is due to wind blowing over the camera microphone. I assure you the whistling and jet noise is what you would hear if you were sitting with me as the video was taken.

Indeed, recent academic research shows that wind power may actually increase greenhouse gas emissions in some cases, depending on the carbon-intensity of back-up generation required because of its intermittent character. On the negative side of the environmental ledger are adverse impacts of industrial wind turbines on birdlife and other forms of wildlife, farm animals, wetlands and viewsheds.

Industrial wind power is not a viable economic alternative to other energy conservation options. Again, the Danish experience is instructive. Its electricity generation costs are the highest in Europe (15¢/kwh compared to Ontario’s current rate of about 6¢). Niels Gram of the Danish Federation of Industries says, “windmills are a mistake and economically make no sense.” Aase Madsen , the Chair of Energy Policy in the Danish Parliament, calls it “a terribly expensive disaster.”

The U.S. Energy Information Administration reported in 2008, on a dollar per MWh basis, the U.S. government subsidizes wind at $23.34 — compared to reliable energy sources: natural gas at 25¢; coal at 44¢; hydro at 67¢; and nuclear at $1.59, leading to what some U.S. commentators call “a huge corporate welfare feeding frenzy.” The Wall Street Journal advises that “wind generation is the prime example of what can go wrong when the government decides to pick winners.”

The Economist magazine notes in a recent editorial, “Wasting Money on Climate Change,” that each tonne of emissions avoided due to subsidies to renewable energy such as wind power would cost somewhere between $69 and $137, whereas under a cap-and-trade scheme the price would be less than $15.

Either a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system creates incentives for consumers and producers on a myriad of margins to reduce energy use and emissions that, as these numbers show, completely overwhelm subsidies to renewables in terms of cost effectiveness.

The Ontario Power Authority advises that wind producers will be paid 13.5¢/kwh (more than twice what consumers are currently paying), even without accounting for the additional costs of interconnection, transmission and back-up generation. As the European experience confirms, this will inevitably lead to a dramatic increase in electricity costs with consequent detrimental effects on business and employment. From this perspective, the government’s promise of 55,000 new jobs is a cruel delusion.

A recent detailed analysis (focusing mainly on Spain) finds that for every job created by state-funded support of renewables, particularly wind energy, 2.2 jobs are lost. Each wind industry job created cost almost $2-million in subsidies. Why will the Ontario experience be different?

In debates over climate change, and in particular subsidies to renewable energy, there are two kinds of green. First there are some environmental greens who view the problem as so urgent that all measures that may have some impact on greenhouse gas emissions, whatever their cost or their impact on the economy and employment, should be undertaken immediately.

Then there are the fiscal greens, who, being cool to carbon taxes and cap-and-trade systems that make polluters pay, favour massive public subsidies to themselves for renewable energy projects, whatever their relative impact on greenhouse gas emissions. These two groups are motivated by different kinds of green. The only point of convergence between them is their support for massive subsidies to renewable energy (such as wind turbines).

This unholy alliance of these two kinds of greens (doomsdayers and rent seekers) makes for very effective, if opportunistic, politics (as reflected in the Ontario government’s Green Energy Act), just as it makes for lousy public policy: Politicians attempt to pick winners at our expense in a fast-moving technological landscape, instead of creating a socially efficient set of incentives to which we can all respond.

Financial Post
Michael J. Trebilcock is Professor of Law and Economics, University of Toronto. These comments were excerpted from a submission last night to the Ontario government’s legislative committee On Bill 150.

Posted: April 08, 2009, 7:29 PM by NP Editor
wind power, Michael J. Trebilcock

Read more: http://network.nationalpost.com

Video: 2/24/2010 Property Value Guarantees Panel:
Ruth Anne Tobias – Presentation/Q&A

Video: 2/24/2010 Property Value Guarantees Panel:
Ruth Anne Tobias & others – Q&A

So, what are we to believe? Let’s take a look at what Tobias has to say.

According to the NortherStar interview on 1/29/10 by Demarcus Robinson:
“DeKalb County negotiated a property value guarantee within 1.5 to .75 of a mile to a turbine,” Tobias said.

Let’s refer to Tobias’ presentation on 2/24/2010.

Take a look at Slide 2 on Page 134:
” Homeowners within 3/4 mile of a turbine ”
” lower price than expected in 3 mos – FPL pays difference… ”

Take a look at Page 137:
” http://dekalbcounty.org/PLanning/windfarm.html ”
” Look for ‘Ordinance’ with conditions (#14) and PVG details within ‘Exhibit D’ ”

Compare the information Tobias presents against the actual document, and you now have a different story. Follow Tobias’ link to the document and you end up looking at a map, not PVG details. So you will need to look at an authentic “Property Value Guarantee Agreement” document.

In this document there is no mention of mos, it’s all in days, either 30 or 180. 30 days regarding notification and 180 days in relation to the property. Here are the facts:

Section 7: “that the Property will be so listed until the occurrence of either the (i) sale of the Property or (ii) expiration of a period of 180 days;”

Section 8: “for a period of 180 days, not to accept any offer below the ASKING PRICE without the express and written approval of the Guarantor.”

Section 10: “within 180 days of listing the Property for sale,”

Section 11.b: “after 180 days of listing the Property for sale,”

Section 12: “during the 180 days of the property being on the market,”

This kind of gross error is inexcusable. How could Tobias, DeKalb County Board Chair and noted conference speaker be so irresponsible and misleading? It makes you wonder if she ever looked at the document and seriously question anything else she has to say.

Video:

The turbines are operational now, and we have experienced first hand shadow flicker. I’m an optimistic realist, but no longer optimistic regarding shadow flicker. This is a small portion of over 45 minutes of shadow flicker that occurred in our home this morning.

Video: 8:42 AM

FPL Energy Illinois Wind, in the lawsuit it filed Friday, says the Lee Village Board “arbitrarily” denied their request for permits to build six wind turbines within the one-and-a-half miles around the village that municipalities have control over under state law. The company wants a judge to order Lee to grant the permits.

But attorney Keith Foster with Foster and Buick Law Group, which represents the village, says the Board’s denial was based on input it received from the wind farm company and after hearing potential reasons for denying the request during two public hearings. He says the Board’s reasons met the requirement for denying the permits.

“The reason would have to have a reasonable basis so any reason at all that is considered rational by an ordinary person would be a basis for denial,” says Foster.

The Village Board’s reasons for the denials included feeling the 450-foot tall turbines would be too close to homes.

The Village also wants a judge to examine how the company’s lawsuit was filed, with the village’s lawyers saying an unidentified, “badge-waving” agent filed the suit and an unidentified person served summons to village board members while demanding they appear in court this week. The law firm says it has serious questions about the tactics of the wind farm company and its attorneys.

“And we are going to monitor that closely and we are going to raise objections with any tactics that are used, any procedures that are employed, that are outside of the rules that we all have to follow that are given to us by the Supreme Court,” says Foster.

An official for the wind farm project calls the claims misinterpretations and misunderstandings.

http://www.1360wlbk.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=559%3Alee-wants-suit-by-wind-farm-company-dismissed&catid=1%3Alatest-news&Itemid=65

“We believe the Village of Lee acted well within its authority in rejecting the sitting request,” attorney John Countryman said in a written statement Wednesday. “I have serious questions about the tactics of this Florida outfit and their Chicago attorneys.”

The document filed Wednesday asks a judge to investigate who was involved in filing the lawsuit and serving the summons. The document also asks a judge to throw the lawsuit out because it was filed improperly.

FPL Energy Illinois Wind LLC filed the lawsuit Friday in DeKalb County Court, claiming the Lee Village Board improperly denied the company’s application for permits to build six wind turbines. The turbines would not be within village limits, but they fall within the village’s jurisdiction, according to state law.

Anthony Pedroni, project manager of the DeKalb-Lee wind farm project, said any problems raised by lawyers for Lee are “misinterpretations or misunderstandings.” He said he was certain the law firm hired by FPL followed the letter of the law in having summons served to Lee Village Board members.

“It’s a well-respected firm, and they know how to properly go about this process,” Pedroni said.

FPL’s lawsuit demands a judge compel approval of the permits – allowing construction to move forward – and to award at least $200,000 in damages for time and resources lost while the project sits idle.

The six turbines involved in this lawsuit are part of a 151-turbine wind farm that straddles the DeKalb-Lee county line. Turbines in the non-municipal portions of the project – which will be home to most of the turbines – are under construction.

Another legal action is pending; a citizens group filed a lawsuit in July, claiming the DeKalb County Board improperly granted construction permits and is seeking a halt to the project.

By Kristen Schmidt

Daily Chronicle

23 September 2009

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — Wind farms have been blamed for disrupting the lives of birds, bats and, most recently, the land-bound sage grouse.

Now the weatherman?

The massive spinning blades affixed to towers 200 feet high can appear on Doppler radar like a violent storm or even a tornado.

The phenomenon has affected several National Weather Service radar sites in different parts the country, even leading to a false tornado alert near Dodge City, Kan., in the heart of Tornado Alley. In Des Moines, Iowa, the weather service received a frantic warning from an emergency worker who had access to Doppler radar images.

The alert was quickly called off in Kansas and meteorologists calmed the emergency worker down, but with enough wind turbines going up last year to power more than 6 million homes and a major push toward alternative energy, more false alerts seem inevitable.

New installations are concentrated, understandably in windy states like Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado and Iowa, all part of Tornado Alley.

Texas, which has more tornadoes than any other state, also has the most wind power capacity.

Dave Zaff, science and operations officer with the National Weather Service office in Buffalo, N.Y., describes the wind farms 20 to 35 miles to the southeast as “more of a pimple or a blotch on your face” that 99 percent of the time will not pose a problem.

But what about those busy, high-stress periods when a meteorologist is tasked with making quick decisions as storms grow violent? In a worse-case scenario, a forecaster could disregard a real storm for turbine interference, but, more likely, would err on the side of caution, Zaff said.

“If you take a glance and then all of the sudden you see red, you might issue an incorrect warning as a result,” he said.

Problems began to surface about three years ago, and seem to occur where a wind farm is built within about 11 miles of a Doppler site, said Tim Crum, with the weather service’s radar operations center in Norman, Okla.

That could become a bigger problem because the same terrain is attractive for both weather radar and wind farms.

“They want to be out in relatively exposed areas, high terrain, those sorts of things,” Crum said. “So we sometimes are looking for the same ground, although we’re already there.”

Software can easily filter out buildings, cell towers and mountain ridges on radar screens. Yet because weather radar seeks motion to warn of storms, there’s no way to filter out the spinning blades.

Microwave radio signals are beamed toward a particular point and meteorologists listen for the “reflection.” Experts can pick out the shape of a storm, or a tornado.

The splatter of green, yellow, orange and red on Doppler screens that are caused by wind farms can look very much like a tornado or a storm.

In Kansas, it was a computer program that picked up on the pattern and issued the alert. A meteorologist who was aware of the phenomenon quickly called off the alert.

The weather service is trying to improve its technology so that meteorologists during severe weather events can more easily tell the difference between dangerous storms and wind farms.

But there are now discussions about shutting down the wind farms when bad storms roll in.

The weather service has no say in where wind farms are sited, though it has analyzed some 500 proposed wind projects in an attempt to cut down on false alarms through better siting and layouts, said Crum.

It is also meeting regularly with AWEA, the wind power trade group.

Laurie Jodziewicz, AWEA’s manager of siting policy, said the association is making sure its members understand the emerging issue and that they consider their projects’ potential effects sooner rather than later.

“You can move turbines around as you’re planning, but once they’re in the ground they’re really, really difficult to move,” Jodziewicz said.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=316752

It’s discouraging to see local government actually vote according to what they want instead of considering the desires of the impacted parties. The DeKalb board approved the turbines for DeKalb county. Check out the comment about how the few must suffer for the good of the rest.

Video: 6/27/2009 07 PM