Aussie Governments Pandering to the Wind Industry, and Enraging Their Own Constituents!

Time to Tune-In Tony: Coalition’s $46 Billion Wind Industry Rescue Package has Liberal Voters Seething

Tony Abbott macfarlane 18.12.13

****

A week or so back, Tony Abbott’s Coalition struck a deal with Labor involving a $46 billion electricity tax aimed at salvaging what’s left of Australia’s wind industry (see our post here).

The ‘deal’ – which has passed the House of Reps – and is on its way to the Senate – is seen by thousands of people in rural communities spread out across the country as a betrayal, not only of their interests, but of the interests of the Nation as a whole (see our posts here and here).

One line from within the ranks is that the Coalition are playing for votes by backing “renewables”. However, there’s a mighty big distinction between the shiny solar panels on a suburban rooftop, and endless seas of bat-chomping, bird slicing, blade-chucking, pyrotechnic, sonic-torturedevices. The former don’t bother anyone much; the latter drive those equipped with the full-range of earthly senses to a state just below (and sometimes above) white-hot fury:

Angry Wind Farm Victims Pull the Trigger: Turbines Shot-Up in Montana and Victoria

What Tony Abbott & Co need to pick up on (real fast) is the fact that it’s ONLY the lunatics of the hard-‘green’-left that are ready to die in a ditch to ‘save’ the wind industry – pumped up by astroturfing outfits like GetUp! – people that will never, ever vote for the Coalition.

Meanwhile – thanks to wind industry front men, Ian “Macca” Macfarlane and his youthful ward, Greg Hunt – the Coalition is pandering to a crowd they can never hope to win; and forsaking those who have – till now – loyally thrown their votes at the Liberals and Nationals.

That loyalty is being sorely tested, as this cracking little piece from STT Champion, Patina Schneider spells out. Patina quite rightly lays into the Liberal’s ‘Disappointing’ Dan Tehan (as have many others – see our postshere and here) for his switch to the dark-side.

Alarmed and Disappointed
Hamilton Spectator
Opinion
Patina Schneider
30 May 2015

I wish to relay my alarm and disappointment with Dan Tehan’s recent appearance on the ABC’s 7.30 report on Thursday 30th April, where he appeared in conjunction with Keppel Prince, Portland Aluminium and Committee of Portland representatives.

Dan Tehan broke ranks with his Coalition members, and urged that the Renewable Energy Target should be higher than the 32,000 gigawatt hours proposed by the Coalition.

He claimed he was “putting jobs before politics”. However he was putting JOBS before the HEALTH of hundreds of his constituents in the electorate of Wannon.

On behalf of the Australian Industrial Wind turbine Awareness Network I ask of Mr. Tehan, member for Wannon, what “hold” does the wind turbine industry have over you, to have steered you so far to the left?

I ask of Mr. Tehan, please declare your interests. They must be significant, given that you are the member responsible for representing the residents harmed and nuisanced by the Cape Bridgewater, Macarthur, Glenthompson and Waubra wind power stations, on a daily basis?

Are these constituents collateral damage?

No one wants to see jobs leave Portland but is the solution to blindly advocate for a Renewable Energy Target which would sanction further harm and misery in the south-west of Victoria, opening the flood gates for the construction of so many additional monster wind farms in your electorate?

The wind industry and its intermittent and acoustically toxic technology have failed Victorians, as I’m afraid, has Dan Tehan. It is simplifying matters to the point of embarrassing, that Dan Tehan is doing the bidding of the Labour Opposition, and continues to blame Keppel Prince’s woes on the Renewable Energy Target’s uncertainty.

The Australian government’s Anti-dumping Commission’s ‘Investigation 221’ tells the real Keppel Prince story. It appears to be one of the wind industry’s abject failure to support local manufacture of wind turbine and tower components.

Keppel Prince is well aware of the dumping of wind towers from China and Korea. In 2007, Keppel Prince had 182 staff employed in the production of wind towers. But in 3.6 ‘Employment numbers’, the Commission’s report reveals; ‘Keppel Prince had a total workforce of 362 at December 2012 of which 71 were employed in the production of wind towers, the number of employees in the production of wind towers had reduced to 64 by June 2013’.

Inflated numbers in tower production were gradually whittled down while the RET enjoyed bipartisan support. Only 20% or so of Keppel Prince’s employees were making wind towers in 2012 while the other 298 employees – the majority of Keppel Prince’s jobs – were largely servicing the aluminium industry which, incidentally, was also being devastated by the same RET, which resulted in exorbitant electricity prices, which Dan was advocating for!

In 2013, as a result of reported dumping and price cutting, it appears that only 64 staff remained employed at Keppel Prince in wind tower manufacture.

There were no further wind tower orders taken after the wind farm at Taralga in N.S.W. But Keppel Prince and its Clean Energy Council associates told the media that RET uncertainty had “made 100 workers redundant today, in direct response to the Abbott government’s move to lower the Renewable Energy Target”.

If Anita Rank from the Committee for Portland (appearing on the same 7.30 report with Dan Tehan) thinks that 80 jobs are the equivalent of 40,000 jobs in Melbourne, Keppel Prince, it would appear just overstated the 60 or so Portland jobs by 20,000 in Melbourne’s terms!!

‘Move to lower renewable energy target claims 100 jobs at Keppel Prince’ was published in The Australian on October 23, 2014. It reported a statement from Keppel Prince: “The continuing uncertainty over large-scale renewables (including the Renewable Energy Target) and related wind tower fabrication projects, TOGETHER with the SIGNIFICANT LOSSES SUSTAINED FROM SUCH ACTIVITIES over the PAST SEVERAL YEARS, have forced Keppel Prince Engineering to review this aspect of its business”.

The real situation is that Keppel Prince had experienced hardships as a consequence of wind tower dumping, and price cutting of wind towers, over a number of years. These hardships, significant losses and resulting job losses, occurred independent of, and irrespective of what was going on with the RET.

Portland has been dudded by the wind industry and its greedy apologists. The former Brack’s government failed to legislate laws that would protect Portland’s interests and didn’t bother to task the wind industry to hold them to their empty claims.

After your appalling display on ABC’s 7.30 Report on Thursday 14th May, we can add you to that list of disappointment, Mr. Tehan.

How about representing those loyal conservative voters who put you in office, the hundreds of your constituents whose health is severely impacted by wind farms in your electorate?

You have turned your back on your traditional Liberal voters.

By promoting Labour party policy, maintaining the Renewable Energy Target at 33,000 gigawatt hours, and putting jobs (I question accuracy of the figures) before HEALTH, you are sentencing thousands of rural Australian families to a life of ongoing pain and suffering, due to infrasound emitted by wind turbines.

You, and your government’s capitulation to the Labor party policy, are also committing millions of Australian power consumers to skyrocketing power prices in the near future.

Last year 34,000 Victorian households were cut off power, due to inability to pay their electricity bills.

What will this figure of “power poor” families, denied the basic necessity of electricity to their homes, skyrocket to as a result of the Coalition’s support for Labor’s higher figure of 33,000 gigawatt hours?
Hamilton Spectator

dan tehan2

****

Nice work Patina! We couldn’t have said it better ourselves. But it’s this observation that deserves a little further notice:

You have turned your back on your traditional Liberal voters“.

life organic

****

The Coalition are setting themselves up for a monumental electoral backlash by pumping a policy that plays well with the inner-city skinny-soy-latte crowd, but which is going to drive power prices through the roof – alienating small business owners and struggling families (see our postshere and here) – and which leaves rural communities broken, bitter and divided:

Unwilling Turbine Hosts Set to Revolt, as NSW Planning Minister – Pru Goward – Slams Spanish Fan Plans at Yass

To continue to pander to urban trendsetters (who will never vote for your team) at the expense of your natural constituents is political suicide.

Tony, keep alienating the previously faithful and they’ll turn to micro parties; or start running independent candidates of their own.  STT hears that plans are afoot to do just that in an effort to unseat Disappointing Dan Tehan. Loyalty doesn’t last so long in the face of political arrogance and contempt.

The Coalition were gifted with the perfect weaponry to bring the LRET debacle, and the great wind power fraud, to an end – in the form of the recommendations made by their own RET Review Panel (see our post here).

Instead, at the beckoning of their wind industry mates and backers, Ian Macfarlane and Greg Hunt cooked up a wind industry rescue package that will cost all Australian power consumers $46 billion: half of which will be directed to wind power outfits – like near-bankrupt Infigen (akaBabcock and Brown); with the balance being recovered as a $65 per MWh fine (aka “the shortfall charge”) – and directed to general revenue (ie a ‘stealth tax’):

Out to Save their Wind Industry Mates, Macfarlane & Hunt Lock-in $46 billion LRET Retail Power Tax

The stench attached to Hunt and Macca’s efforts to save their mates in the wind industry will easily outlast religion (see our post here); and, for their thousands of rural victims, will never be forgiven; or forgotten.

hunt macfarlane

****

Meanwhile, one of Pac Hydro’s Cape Bridgewater victims, Crispin Trist let fly with this cracking riposte to plans by Synergy Wind to spear dozens of blade-chucking monsters in the flight-path of Portland’s airport.

Collision course!
Warrnambool Standard
Letters
30 May 2015

I refer to the article in the Portland Observer dated 22nd May 2015, “New wind tower hope”.

I read with concern the proposal by wind developer Synergy Wind to build a wind facility at the Bridgewater Lakes. It is my understanding that to do so would present a clear conflict of interest to the safe operations of aircraft movements into and out of Portland airport. A quick search of any aerial satellite imagery shows that the Bridgewater Lakes are located directly under the flightpath to the western approach of runway 08, this being the main runway at Portland airport.

Wind turbines can present a real risk to aviation. Inflow turbulence up to 200 metres in front of an operating industrial scale wind turbine can suck light aircraft or microlights into the blades. Wake turbulence of up to 500 metres or more behind the spinning blades could throw an aircraft to the ground! One pilot nearly discovered this in NSW when attempting to fly a light plane behind an operating wind turbine. Fortunately in that instance the land dropped away and they were able to recover the aircraft out of the dive and fly to safety. There have even been recorded instances around the world of aircraft crashing into wind turbine infrastructure with fatalities!

Any proposal to erect wind turbines in alignment with runway 08 only 2-3 kilometres from the runway threshold would to my mind be completely irresponsible and could present a high risk of collision to approaching or departing aircraft. Add to this the risks of bad weather with reduced visibility, high winds and driving rains or flying at night and you have a recipe for disaster.

Does the Glenelg Shire Council intend to close Portland airport? The airport has already been moved once to make way for the Aluminium Smelter. To do so again would be an extremely costly exercise and many funds have already been spent upgrading the existing airport. The current operations at the airport that I am aware of include regular scheduled passenger operations, the Flying Doctor, the CFA fire fighting operations, crop dusting, the Coastguard, various light aircraft movements, and the RAAF for touch and goes, the Roulettes and runway approach practise by Orion and Globemaster aircraft. This states to me that the airport is serving its purpose well and should not be interfered with. If anything the facility should be expanded to cater for future requirements.

It has been explained to me that the current maximum aircraft type able to use the facility is the DC-9 (or Boeing 717) passenger or freighter jet. Surely upgrading to Boeing 737 or Airbus A320 standards might be a more sensible option in future. These are the most popular jets flying in the world today. Indeed the Prime Minister`s VIP transport is a Boeing 737!

Wind operator Pacific Hydro are also on record as stating to a packed community meeting at the Cape Bridgewater Kiosk back in 2008/09 that no further wind towers could be developed any further north of the current wind facility site as they would interfere with operations at the airport. Danny Halstead stated this clearly to the assembled community. So how has this proposal by Synergy Wind been allowed to progress to this stage?

A similar wind facility development has been proposed under the western flightpath into Warrnambool airport. The site is located approximately 2 kilometres to the north of Koroit on the Woolsthorpe Road. A MET mast has been erected and is visible from the road on the left when driving north. And yet the Warrnambool Council in a positive move is spending money to upgrade the airport.

Why undermine this investment by allowing a wind facility to be built under the flightpath? What is going on here? Who is in charge of these absurd and downright dangerous planning conflicts in the South West? There is a worrying trend that is occurring here in the rush to develop industrial scale wind turbines. The lives of both pilots and passengers could be put at risk if these two wind developments are built. And what do CASA the Civil Aviation Safety Authority have to say about this?
Crispin Trist
Cape Bridgewater

As Crispin points out, planes and giant fans just don’t mix:

4 killed as Plane slams into Giant Fans in South Dakota

plane_new_crop_t607-665x385

Wind Refugee, Barb Ashbee, Speaks Out About the Trauma She Has Been Forced to Endure!

A Short Essay on Misguided Environmentalism, Bullies and Losing One’s Home

You were able to move. Now you have to forgive and carry on. Move on with your life and find the path back to happiness you enjoyed before it all happened.
This is what my mind tells my heart. That is what some of my friends are thinking, I can feel it. A gentle sort of ‘get over it’. And some days I feel like that is what I need to do.
But the heart still feels the pain. The heart feels the injustice for an event that wasn’t an accident, or being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or brought on by our own actions, or a natural disaster or single tragedy that all our families suffer throughout our lives. No, this tragedy has been intense, life changing; trust destroying, personality maiming and spirit crushing because it simply did not have to happen.
Why am I still angry?
I am angry that our perfectly healthy bodies were pummeled into illness by infrasound and relentless noise. That we were no longer allowed the right to get sleep in our home. That with thumping noise on too many nights over 60 decibels at times and a house that vibrated almost every day we were unable to thrive. Headaches, heart palpitations, chest pressure, sleep deprivation, and eventually hyper- thyroidism, nosebleeds requiring treatment, anxiety in pets with some crying and vomiting at the same time we felt the worst effects. I am angry that our government leaders knew all this from our very first letter asking for help and they lied to us, let us continue on for months and months until we just couldn’t take it anymore and hired a lawyer with money we really didn’t have to spare. And I am really angry that our awful experience was not enough, piled on top of all of the others we found out about, not enough to make it stop.
Instead new projects forged ahead and more families are sick.

And what of the non- physical impacts?
My husband fretted because there was one last piece of board that needed to go on to finish the inside of the dream shop he had just built and he didn’t have the energy or desire to do it. The perfect shop to house his classic car, with the fully insulated walls, painted floor and housing his collection of car memorabilia was barely used when he had to give it up.
He stressed over our future.
We lived in uncertainty, wondering how we were going to be able to stay there yet knowing we could never sell and if we did we could never pass this on to some innocent family. I thank the stars that we had even bought the house so that the previous family who had 6 children didn’t have this set upon them. What would they have done?

While most friends and family are sympathetic others ask why we are complaining so much when obviously, according to government research, there are no ties between the turbines and what has happened to us. How do we explain these erroneous and deceitful government statements on a complicated issue in a sentence or two without sounding nuts?
I want people to be angry; I want them to write letters to our leaders asking how they can treat people so bad but would I do that if I were on the periphery? I’m not so sure. In fact, when I first heard about the earliest families in phase one having problems, I felt sure they would be resolved. After all, is that not the role of government? To put the citizens foremost, to protect our health and home and look after people in harm? That’s what I thought.
People not connected to this issue are not sure. It’s hard to explain the impacts when you don’t have anything more to show but exhausted faces that can be caused by anything. The rest is hidden. The headaches are hidden, the sleep deprivation is debilitating but you can’t see it. The heart palpitations, head and chest pressure, incredible frustration trying to sleep in a vibrating home is hidden.

What do you do when you do get up the courage to speak with your doctor about it and they stare stone faced with no comment, so unworthy are you that they don’t even bother to note the symptoms in your records. Or when they do finally speak they offer a condescending comment that leaves you in tears? Nobody sees that either.

I could go on and on about the injustice and the long term effects but until this government takes a stand to stop this industry and turns their help to those suffering instead of funding the perpetrators then I am severely overpowered. If only people knew the real story.

There are
those who are involved in perpetrating and covering up the harm;
those who know and are fighting with every breath, some loudly, some quietly;
those who know but don’t know what to do;
those who know but don’t care;
and thanks to an impressive 5 star cover-up,
those who don’t know and will never know.
Unfortunately for all, the last two hold the majority of the population.
And so it continues….

Windpushers Play the Same Dirty Games, Everywhere They Go….Lies, Fraud, and Cover-ups! Disgusting!


Frank Haggerty

Why did Falmouth officials hide this letter for years: Because they were aware of the 110 decibels of noise prior to the installations ! – That’s why they avoided the Special Permit 240 -166

The Massachusetts Superior Court found the town broke its own laws and now is still worried about money rather than the health and property rights of up to 200 homes.

Falmouth is guilty of assault and battery on the environment – It’s time federal prosecutors!

U.S. Attorney, Ms. Ortiz has overseen the criminal prosecution of corrupt Massachusetts Speaker of the House Sal DiMasi. Sal DiMasi is the father of the Massachusetts Green Communities Act. If she can put him in jail its time to start looking at everyone involved in the two Falmouth wind turbines

Vestas raises concerns about turbine noise (Letter)

Bruce Mabbott – August 3, 2010
Impact on People Noise Massachusetts

After noise complaints started coming in following the erection of WIND 1, the first Falmouth turbine at the wastewater treatment facility, Vestas required confirmation that the Town of Falmouth “understands they are fully responsible for the site selection of the turbine and bear all responsibilities to address any mitigation needs of the neighbors.” WIND 2 would not be released to the town for erection until the letter was signed. The letter explaining the situation is provided below and can be accessed by selecting the link(s) on this page.

August 3, 2010
Mr. Gerald Potamis
WasteWater Superintendent
Town of Falmouth Public Works
59 Town Hall Square
Falmouth, MA 02540

RE: Falmouth WWTF Wind Energy Facility II “Wind II”, Falmouth, MA
Contract No. #3297

Dear Mr. Potamis,

Due to the sound concerns regarding the first wind turbine installed at the wastewater treatment facility, the manufacturer of the turbines, Vestas, is keen for the Town of Falmouth to understand the possible noise and other risks associated with the installation of the second wind turbine.

The Town has previously been provided with the Octave Band Data / Sound performance for the V82 turbine. This shows that the turbine normally operates at 103.2dB but the manufacturer has also stated that it may produce up to 110dB under certain circumstances. These measurements are based on IEC standards for sound measurement which is calculated at a height of 10m above of the base of the turbine.

We understand that a sound study is being performed to determine what, if any, Impacts the second turbine will have to the nearest residences. Please be advised that should noise concerns arise with this turbine, the only option to mitigate normal operating sound from the V82 is to shut down the machine at certain wind speeds and directions. Naturally this would detrimentally affect power production.

The manufacturer also needs confirmation that the Town of Falmouth understands they are fully responsible for the site selection of the turbine and bear all responsibilities to address any mit igation needs of the neighbors.

Finally, the manufacturer has raised the possibility of ice throw concerns. Since Route 28 is relatively close to the turbine, precautions should be taken in weather that may cause icing.

To date on this project we have been unable to move forward with signing the contract with Vestas. The inability to release the turbine for shipment to the project site has caused significant [SIC] delays in our project schedule. In order to move forward the manufacturer requires your understanding and acknowledgement of these risks. We kindly req uest for this acknowledgement to be sent to us by August 4, 2010, as we have scheduled a coordination meeting with Vestas to discuss the project schedule and steps forward for completion of the project.

Please sign in the space provided below to indicate your understanding and acknowledgement of this letter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me.

Sincerely,

(Bruce Mabbott’s signature)
_____________________
Bruce Mabbott Gerald Potamis
Project Manager Town of Falmouth

CC: Sumul Shah, Lumus Construction, Inc.
(Town of Falmouth’s Wind-1 and Wind-2 Construction contractor)

Stephen Wiehe, Weston & Sampson
(Town of Falmouth’s contract engineers)

Brian Hopkins, Vestas
(Wind-1, Wind-2’s turbine manufacturer, and also Webb/NOTUS turbine)

Tales of Wind Turbine Torture….NOT a Bedtime Story!

Curt Devlin: Details a Decade of Turbine Torture

Curt Devlin

****

Curt Devlin hales from Fairhaven, Massachusetts U.S.A. He was formerly a Teaching Fellow in the Philosophy Department at Tulane University.  He revved up against the great wind power fraud back in 2007, when a wind power outfit set out to spear a clutch of giant fans into the undisturbed and ecologically sensitive salt marshes surrounding a quite estuary in the Little Bay area of Fairhaven – an area bordered by densely populated neighborhoods. Although this project was defeated, construction began on the sly, starting on Veteran’s Day in November of 2011.

Since then, Devlin been an outspoken critic of the wind industry and its proponents. He’s written numerous articles and editorials on this and related topics. He has been a guest speaker at the Fairhaven Wind Forum in 2012, where he criticized the irresponsible siting of turbines in residential neighborhoods across Massachusetts and around the world.

In 2013, he spoke on the fundamental human right to be free of unwarranted experimentation at the Falmouth Human Rights Conference in Falmouth, Massachusetts. Professionally, Devlin works as a software architect focused on the development of health science solutions for the detection and treatment of cancer and the improvement of human health.

Here’s Curt detailing a decade-long, unnecessary nightmare.

June 1 Ten Years Massachusetts Wind Turbine Torture
Friends Against Wind
Curt Devlin
1 June 2015

“People are willing to tolerate, approve, and contribute to the torture of their neighbors with the ill effects of wind turbines simply because they have been told by public officials, the media, or green zealots that it is necessary to ‘save the planet’ from global climate change.”

It is easy to forget just how essential sleep is to health and happiness; until of course, you yourself have been deprived of it for a night or two. Firsthand experience of sleep deprivation, even for a few days, is a powerful reminder of how mentally and physically debilitating it is. Even the ongoing disruption or restriction of sleep for a relatively short period of time can have devastating health consequences. Medical research has clearly shown that sleep is essential to human health and wellbeing. Prolonged sleep deprivation has been linked to memory loss, hallucination, weakened resistance to pain, obesity, hypertension, diabetes, impaired immune response, extreme anxiety, stress, clinical depression, and suicide. In the most extreme cases, animal experimentation suggests that lack of sleep can kill you.

Sleep deprivation has long been recognized as torture by the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the United Nations Convention against Torture (CAT), and the United States War Crimes Act. Depriving someone of proper sleep is torture, regardless of whether it is perpetrated by the CIA against suspected terrorists, OR by reckless planning authorities who permit the wind industry to site industrial-scale wind turbines in residential neighborhoods, or by noise pollution regulatory authorities and health authorities who ignore consistent reports of sleep deprivation from neighboring residents. When authorities deem developments “compliant” with regulations, or wind developers effect specious mitigations; they are inflicting torture. They are violating fundamental human rights.

Recently, the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee released what has come to be known as the Torture Report. It reveals that sleep deprivation was one of the frequently used CIA “enhanced interrogation” tactics. The use of prolonged sleep deprivation led Committee Chairman, Diane Feinstein to conclude “…that, under any common meaning of the term, CIA detainees were tortured.” She goes on to say “…that the conditions of confinement and the use of authorized and unauthorized interrogation and conditioning techniques were cruel, inhuman, and degrading.” The same can be said of the practice of siting industrial turbines too close to homes. Failure to take action to stop excessive noise pollution, or to enforce existing legal limits on “noise nuisance” whenever noise-induced sleep disturbance or deprivation is reported by wind turbine neighbors, hosts, or their families is full complicity with torture.

It is grimly ironic that the US Senate Committee condemns sleep deprivation as cruel and inhuman when used by the CIA interrogators on terror suspects, but blithely ignores it when imposed by wind developers and local authorities on ordinary, law-abiding citizens who pose no threat to anyone. The only threat they pose is to the income generated by taxpayer subsidies to unscrupulous wind developers.

Is it really fair to compare the torture of detainees to that of turbine neighbors? Consider that the detainees were forced to endure sleeplessness for a few days at a time on many occasions, but never more than a week. Wind turbine victims must endure this same deprivation for arbitrary periods of time whenever the wind is blowing, sometimes intermittently for decades. Often, their only hope of escape or reprieve from this torment is to flee their homes which no one will buy—despite the fact that they are not suspected of any crimes whatsoever. At least detainees were not forced to lie awake and watch their families suffer the same deprivation.

When the turbines were shut down during a winter storm with near hurricane-force winds, one young mother of infant twins living in Fairhaven, Massachusetts USA wrote “Isn’t it crazy that in a weird twist it takes a blizzard to give us peace. According to the power dash the beasts stopped at around 9PM.” Later on, she wrote, “I sleep ok in the basement but the babies still wake up randomly almost every night.” Most who are tortured by turbines will tell you that “the beast” can usually finds them even when they are hiding in the cellar. Not only are people kept awake by the turbines, but they must endure headaches, nausea, dizziness, breathing difficulties, and in some cases uncontrollable anxiety and severe acute depression.

In one incident described in the Torture Report, an Afghani named Arsala Khan “…suffered disturbing hallucinations after 56 hours of standing sleep deprivation….” Afterwards, the CIA determined that he actually was not involved in any plans or activities to harm the U.S! The innocent victims tortured by the wind industry are in a position to know just how it feels to be tortured indiscriminately.

Publicly, the Bush administration and the CIA chose to describe their treatment of detainees as “enhanced interrogation.” The wind industry chooses to call its noise impact mere “annoyance” and refer to residents’ “concerns”. These euphemisms are carefully selected to conceal the ugly reality that sleep deprivation is torture, plain and simple. Such terms attempt to hide what is known to be—by any standard of human decency—utterly wrong and depraved. The Senate Intelligence Committee and others have begun to shine a spotlight on the CIA torture program; but the wind industry program of cruelty continues to operate with impunity, largely beyond the glare of public scrutiny.

When the US Senate Committee report placed the issue of torture front and center in the media, it prompted outrage among some journalists, who have used terms like ‘depravity,’ ‘harrowing,’ and ‘gruesome’ to describe the techniques used by the CIA. Yet the media has no outrage when prolonged sleep deprivation and cruelties are routinely visited on local neighborhoods throughout America and across the world. When the subject turns to wind turbines, all talk of human rights violations immediately goes silent.

Remarkably, and despite the condemnation of the Intelligence Committee and the outraged media reaction to it, public opinion polls consistently show that a majority of Americans still consider the CIA’s use of torture justified. Even those who disagree with this view, may be able to understand it. The rationale for torture is that it was necessary to prevent another 911; but what, then, is the rationale for torturing ordinary men, women, and children in their own homes on a nightly basis? What accounts for the almost universal apathy of government officials, mainstream media, and the general public, toward the victims of wind energy? It seems America is one nation, with liberty, and justice for all—except for those unlucky few, who can be tortured without any good cause at all. Our silence gives consent to continue.

Perhaps this silence about turbine victims can be partially explained by a monumental form of social denial. Psychologists have noted that when confronted with tacit complicity with torture, most people tend to diminish in their own minds the actual harm being inflicted. Terms like ‘enhanced interrogation’ and ‘annoyance’ encourage such forms of self-deception. However, this pervasive complicity with torture cannot be fully explained by denial alone. There is a far more ominous and compelling explanation supplied long ago by the experiments of Stanley Milgram.

In 1962, Milgram, a Harvard-trained psychologist, devised a set of experiments designed to explain why people are willing to accept and even participate in torture. Initially, Milgram thought it was a lack of moral fiber. Prior to conducting his experiments, Milgram believed that most Americans were morally superior to those who were responsible for the torture and atrocities of the Holocaust. He predicted that most of his (American) subjects would reject the use of torture out of hand. Milgram also polled many of his fellow psychologists, who made similar predictions. Contrary to all expectations, however, Milgram’s experiment actually proved that about two thirds of Americans were willing to administer torture by electroshock to innocent victims, even to the point of possible lethality, simply because they were told by someone in a position of perceived authority that it was necessary to do so. Contrary to the much beloved American mythology of rugged individualism and personal independence, Milgram has shown that most Americans are just as blindly obedient to authority as everyone else.

Since that time, Milgram’s experiment has been repeated dozens of times by him and other scientists, with subjects from different counties and cultures, but the results are always the same. About 65% of all subjects are willing to administer torture—even to the point of lethality—as long as someone in authority tells them it is necessary. Even when controls are added to identify potentially confounding factors, this result is highly repeatable. This shows that obedience to authority, even to the point of partaking in torture of innocent victims, is so deeply ingrained in human nature that it transcends language, culture, and moral outlook—it is a truly global phenomenon. The evidence for this is sadly pervasive.

People are willing to ignore, condone, and even participate in torturing detainees simply because they are told that it was necessary to protect America from new terrorist attacks. Similarly, people are willing to tolerate, approve, and contribute to the torture of their neighbors with the ill effects of wind turbines simply because they have been told by public officials, the media, or green zealots that it is necessary to “save the planet” from global climate change. There is ample evidence to show that torture is not an effective means of interrogation and that industrial wind turbines cannot stem climate change. No matter. Like subjects in Milgram’s experiment, the public is being told by authority that “the experiment requires that you continue.”

In a position paper entitled Leave No Marks: Enhanced Interrogation Techniques and the Risk of Criminality, Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) and Human Rights First (HRF) have collaborated to publish a detailed condemnation of the CIA torture program, as well as the participation of physicians in these practices. Section 6 specifically details the physical harm and health consequences of forced sleep deprivation and interruption. It also delineates the criminal consequences for anyone who knowingly engages in it. Here it is pointed out that “the U.S. State Department has condemned Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey for using sleep deprivation as a form of torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.”

In case anyone is inclined to minimize sleep deprivation as mere annoyance, as the wind industry and its advocates would have you believe; Leave No Marks goes on to note that:

Even sleep restriction of four hours per night for less than a week can result in physical harm, including hypertension, cardiovascular disease, altered glucose tolerance and insulin resistance. Sleep deprivation can impair immune function and result in increased risk of infectious diseases. Further, chronic pain syndromes are associated with alterations in sleep continuity and sleep patterns.

Many of those who are routinely awakened by nearby industrial turbines would consider themselves lucky to get even four consecutive hours of uninterrupted sleep on a regular basis. This paper notes that U.S. federal courts have found that sleep deprivation is also a violation of the Eight Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Perhaps it is time for groups like Physicians for Human Rights and Human Rights First and indeed the medical profession generally, to turn their intention toward the ongoing torture and cruelty perpetrated by the wind industry. Surely, such acts are criminal whether they are committed by governments or private industry.

Dr. William Hallstein, treating psychiatrist from Falmouth USA, made it abundantly clear that the impacts of the turbines are indeed tantamount to torture in his letter to the Falmouth Town Board of Health. It is telling that Justice Muse from the Falmouth Superior Court issued an injunction in December 2013 to prevent “irreparable harm to physical and psychological health” by turning the turbines off at night. The turbines at Falmouth (USA) remain turned off, over a year later.

Perhaps it’s time to face our own complicity and involvement in these fundamental violations of both civil and human rights, as well.

The wind industry cannot hide behind a claim of ignorance about the devastating impact of wind turbine noise on human health. N.D. Kelley and other NASA scientists from the Solar Energy Research Institute (SERI) have published papers that ascribe the direct causation of human disturbance to wind turbine noise. This group published numerous papers on this subject between 1982 and 1985 based on sound research and clear evidence. Then, in 1987, this research was presented directly to the wind industry at the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) Conference in San Francisco. In short, the wind industry has continued to site its industrial scale power and noise generators near residential neighborhoods for more than thirty years, knowing full well that it was inflicting cruelty and suffering on those living near them. The silence of public officials, the media, and the public indicates wind turbine torture may be allowed to continue for decades to come.

There can be no doubt that wind turbines cause chronic sleep deprivation, and no doubt that sleep deprivation is torture. The scientific evidence that turbines do cause sleeplessness is already prolific and continues to grow. Moreover, the most comprehensive literature reviews on this question reveal that there is virtually no independent evidence to controvert this conclusion. Perhaps the most damning evidence of all comes from the public record of heath complaints from people around the world. According to the noted epidemiologist Carl V. Phillips, “There is overwhelming evidence that large electricity-generating wind turbines (hereafter: turbines) cause serious health problems in a nontrivial fraction of residents living near them.” Among these public health reports from turbine neighbors, sleep deprivation and disruption are by far the most common.

Taken together, the science and the public record of adverse health reports offer clear and compelling evidence that wind turbines are instruments of torture. Therefore, anyone who advocates for, or participates in, the siting of wind turbines near people is inflicting torture on them. Anyone who contributes to, or endorses, unsafe government noise pollution regulations, or who allows them to continue unabated when turbines are clearly causing sleep deprivation and other forms of human misery, or who ignores community complaints, or obstructs the accurate measurement of infrasound and low frequency noise inside homes is complicit with torture. And, anyone who knowingly conducts spurious turbine noise mitigations, or who permits or helps to perpetuate levels of infrasound and low frequency noise emissions above the thresholds established by Dr. Neil Kelley, and confirmed most recently by Steven Cooper’s research at Cape Bridgewater in Australia, must be held accountable for inflicting, or helping to perpetuate torture by prolonged sleep deprivation. Those who do so are guilty of criminal violation of both civil and human rights on an industrial scale.

This is why the global wind industry has strategically and systematically sought to silence wind turbine hosts and neighbors with property buy-outs and non-disclosure agreements. Undoubtedly, this is also why they and those who support them have publicly targeted acoustic engineers, health practitioners, and public health experts who have attempted to expose this truth in accordance with their canons of professional ethics. This industry subjects legitimate science to ridicule, its authors to character assassination, and its sleepless victims to blame and aspersions of mental defect. All of this is done to cloak conscious criminal cruelty in the name of unbridled greed.

In its determination to hide the ugly reality of industrial wind turbines, this industry uses money and the false promise of cheap energy to exert undue influence over public officials. It substitutes pseudo-science for legitimate science, spends untold millions on PR campaigns to drown out honest journalism, and sponsors fear-mongering in place of reasoned public discourse on renewable energy.

There may be no better evidence for this campaign of pubic deception than the so-called “Wind Turbine Health Impact Study: Report of Independent Expert Panel” produced in January, 2012 by an unholy alliance between the wind industry and Massachusetts governor’s office. This document epitomizes the fraudulence, distortion, and misinformation that flourish when wind industry influence over government goes unchecked by public scrutiny and legal safeguards. The title notwithstanding, none of the authors of this so-called health study had any recognized expertise related to the health effects of wind turbines. None had ever given a physical examination to a turbine sufferer, and no turbine-related health complaints were investigated during the course of this study—despite the vocal and repeated pleas by effected residents to be examined as part of it. Although insufficient peer-review was one of the most salient criticism leveled against the legitimate studies reviewed; the Massachusetts study itself was not submitted to peer-review before its publication. For these and other reasons, it was deemed junk science by Dr. Raymond Hartmann, who is widely recognized for his expertise in analyzing scientific evidence, and exposing the junk science used by the Tobacco industry to defend its products.

The “Expert Panel” study was published by the Massachusetts Departments of Environmental Protection and Public Health. When such junk science such as this is published by the very agencies responsible for protecting the environment and public health, it gives them the ring of authority. It is as though the state has mandated to an unsuspecting public that the torture must continue. In Milgram’s experiment, when a subject refused to continue administering shocks, the authority figure would reassure them by saying something to the effect that no permanent tissue damage will be caused. In that context, the statement was quite true because no real shock was actually being given. But in the case of wind turbines, government sanctioned torture is very real and does real damage to health and safety—and that damage may indeed be permanent. As the epigraph from Leave No Marks reminds us, “The absence of physical evidence should not be construed to suggest that torture did not occur, since such acts of violence against persons frequently leave no marks or permanent scars.”

For those who are willing to face their own conscience, there may be a glimmer of hope in Stanley Milgram’s otherwise bleak findings. In some of his later experiments, Milgram tried to determine how conformity would affect the obedience of the experimental subjects. He found that when at least two others in the room refused to comply with authority, only about 10% of the experimental subjects were willing to continue torturing. For those who have the courage to defy authority, it seems that disobedience can be contagious, and raising your voice loudly, publicly, and repeatedly against indiscriminant torture and injustice can truly make a difference.
Friends against wind

Nightmare (1962) Jerry wakes up

Sanity returning to the UK! Are our politicians smart enough to follow their lead?

New curbs can block ‘health risk’ wind farms

Government grants new powers for critics to stop the building of turbines.

  • Critics of huge wind farms have been handed power to block developments
  • Energy Secretary Amber Rudd has promised to strip her department of its power to force through large wind-farm projects against local opposition
  • Move comes amid new health warnings for those living close to turbines

 Energy Secretary Amber Rudd promised to strip her department of its power to force through wind-farms against local opposition. The move comes amid new health warnings for those living near turbines.

By Glen Owen and Brendan Carlin for The Mail on Sunday

Critics of huge wind farms received a boost last night after the Government gave them new powers to block the developments.

The move, by Energy Secretary Amber Rudd, comes amid new health warnings for those living close to turbines.

Ms Rudd has promised to strip her department of its power to force through large wind-farm projects against local opposition.

She is also expected to crack down on Government subsidies for the onshore farms.

Under current rules, the Energy Secretary can have the final say on giant wind farms of 50 megawatts and over.

But Ms Rudd will today pledge to lay down that power. It means farms will in future be treated in the same way as a planning application for a home extension – a matter to be decided purely by the local council.

The action was backed by anti-wind-farm campaigner Tory MP Chris Heaton-Harris, who has presented Ministers with a report warning that sleep deprivation, migraines and hearing problems could be just some of the effects of living within a mile of a wind farm.

The Greed Energy Scam is Crippling Germany!

German Government In Crisis Over Escalating Cost Of Climate Policy

European Power Plants Face Widespread Bankruptcies

An aerial view shows Vattenfall's Jaenschwalde brown coal power station near Cottbus, eastern Germany August 8, 2010. Photo: Reuters/Fabrizio Bensch

Germany’s economics minister Sigmar Gabriel (SPD) wants to levy penalty payments onto coal plants if they produce CO2 emissions above a certain threshold. Against this plan intense resistance is growing in Germany: Within the Christian Democrat, within industry and – for especially dangerous for Gabriel – within the trade unions. The Christian Democrats (CDU) in particular are taking on Gabriel’s climate levy. And Merkel is allowing her party colleagues to assail him. Armin Laschet, the vice chairman of the Federal CDU, is accusing Gabriel of breaking the coalition agreement.  –Jochen Gaugele , Martin Greive , Claudia Kade, Die Welt, 25 May 2015

The transition to renewable power generation is accelerating closures of coal and gas-fired power generation plants at a quicker rate than expected. According to UBS, policymakers may have to take measures to prevent widespread bankruptcies in the European electricity market. That’s the conclusions drawn by investment bank UBS, who have produced a report on the subject. According to their data, some 70 GW of coal and gas-fired power generation shut-downs have occurred in the last five years, and the pace is increasing, according to the analysis. –Diarmaid Williams, Power Engineering International, 11 May 2015

The world’s richest nations are unlikely to reach a deal to phase out subsidies for coal exports at talks in June, reducing the chances of a new global climate change agreement at a U.N. conference in Paris, officials and campaigners say. One European Union official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the EU hoped to “nudge forwards” the debate, but that within the EU, Germany was an obstacle, while Japan was the main opponent in the OECD as a whole. –Barbara Lewis and Susanna Twidale, Reuters, 27 May 2015

To many western environmentalists, who are determined to see a binding global deal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the UN climate change conference in Paris later this year, India’s rising coal use is anathema. However, across a broad range of Delhi politicians and policymakers there is near unanimity. There is, they say, simply no possibility that at this stage in its development India will agree to any form of emissions cap, let alone a cut. — David Rose, The Guardian, 27 May 2015

The idea that India can set targets in Paris is completely ridiculous and unrealistic. It will not happen. This is a difficult concept for eco-fundamentalists, and I say this as a guy who is considered in India to be very green. Copenhagen failed because of climate evangelism. I was sitting for days with Gordon Brown, Ed Miliband, Angela Merkel, Barack Obama and Sarkozy. It was absolutely bizarre. It failed because of an excess of evangelical zeal, of which Brown was the chief proponent. Even with the most aggressive strategy on nuclear, wind, hydro and solar, coal will still provide 55% of electricity consumption by 2030, which means coal consumption will be 2.5 or three times higher than at present. –Jairam Ramesh, India’s former environment minister, The Guardian, 27 May 2015

Open Submission by Carmen Krogh, regarding the ERT for Niagara Region Wind Corp.

By Carmen Krogh, BScPharm
May 25, 2015
To Whom It May Concern
Re: ERT Case No. 14-096 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW TRIBUNAL IN THE
MATTER OF an appeal by Mothers Against Wind Turbines Inc and Renewable
Energy Approval No. 4353- 9HMP2R issued by the Director, Ministry of the
Environment, on November 6, 2014 to Niagara Region Wind Corporation.
This Commentary is public and may be shared.
I declare no potential conflicts of interest and have received no financial support with respect
to the research and authorship of this Commentary.
1. ERT Case No. 14-096 states the onus on the Appellant:
[8] Pursuant to s. 145.2.1 of the EPA, the onus is on the Appellant to establish that
engaging in the Project in accordance with the REA will cause serious harm to human
health and/or serious and irreversible harm to plant life, animal life or the natural
environment. (Page 4)
2. The ERT dismissed the Appeal:
[9] For the reasons that follow, the Tribunal finds that the Appellant has failed to meet
either the Health Test or the Environmental Test and has not established the necessary
elements of a s. 7 Charter violation and, therefore, the appeal is dismissed. (Page 4)
3. Ms. Shellie Correia, mother of Joey, testified during this ERT and provided a letter from
her son’s specialist, a Behavioral Pediatrician.
Joey has been under the specialist care for 8 years and is diagnosed with a “Sensory
Processing Disorder”.
Excessive, uncontrollable noise can lead to sensory overload and Joey’s specialist noted
that Joey “is exceptionally more vulnerable”.
With respect to his condition, the specialist states “Wind turbines concern me, given my
strong knowledge of neurobiology.”

4. Other members of the community testified regarding their concerns associated with
children being exposed to IWTs while at home, at school (or both), or while visiting.
5. Ms Correia provided additional citations such as Joey’s Individual Education Plan in
support of his risk factors and that of children in general. See the Appendix below.
6. Ms Correia has advised Premier Wynne, Energy Minister Chiarelli, the Approval Holder
and the project manager, and many others in an effort to protect her son and other
children from harm.
7. Several 3 MWatt IWTs will be in close proximity, with one of the turbines 550 metres
from the family home.
8. Joey and other children will have to travel past transmission lines while attending school
and for other purposes.
9. In its Decision, the ERT states:
[119] In response to Ms. Correia’s concerns about the impact of noise on her son who
has “developmental issues, including ADHD, anxiety and serious processing issues
(mainly, but not exclusively aural)”, Dr. McCunney said that he is unaware of any
scientific literature that suggests that wind turbine noise would adversely affect the
health of a child with these developmental disorders. (Page 28)
10. Dr. Robert McCunney testified on behalf of the Approval Holder. His qualification states:
[95] On agreement of the parties, Dr. McCunney was qualified by the Tribunal as a
medical doctor specializing in occupational and environmental medicine with
particular expertise in the health implications of noise exposure. He provided expert
opinion evidence on behalf of the Approval Holder. (Page 21)
11. Based on this qualification, indications are that Dr. McCunney was not appearing as a
Behavioral Pediatrician, specializing in assessment and care of children with
developmental and mental health problems.
12. Regarding noise in general, the World Health Organization has identified the fetus,
babies, children and youth including those with pre-existing medical conditions and
special needs as a vulnerable population group.
World Health Organization, Children and Noise, Children’s Health and the
Environment, WHO Training Package for the Health Sector, http://www.who.int/ceh

Commentary ERT Case No. 14-096
By Carmen Krogh, BScPharm, May 25, 2015
Any errors or omissions are unintended.
13.
Another WHO reference relating to children states:
Noise is an underestimated threat that can cause a number of short- and long-term
health problems, such as for example sleep disturbance, cardiovascular effects, poorer
work and school performance, hearing impairment, etc.
World Health Organization Noise Facts and Figures
health/noise/facts-and-figures
14.
Stansfeld and Matheson (2003) state:
It is likely that children represent a group which is particularly vulnerable to the non-
auditory health effects of noise. They have less cognitive capacity to understand and
anticipate stressors and lack well-developed coping strategies. Moreover, in view of
the fact that children are still developing both physically and cognitively, there is a
possible risk that exposure to an environmental stressor such as noise may have
irreversible negative consequences for this group…
Stephen A Stansfeld and Mark P Matheson (2003), Noise pollution: non-auditory
effects on health, British Medical Bulletin 2003; 68: 243–257 DOI:
10.1093/bmb/ldg033
Additional citations on children’s risk factors from exposure to noise in general are available.
Conclusion
Research indicates the fetus, babies, children and youth including those with pre-existing
medical conditions and special needs are a vulnerable population group to the effects of noise
exposure in general.
The specialist who has diagnosed and treats Joey states:
I, as a “normal brain” (or typical brain) individual would not want this risk to my
mental health (or my children’s) in my neighbourhood. The placement of these
devices must be thoughtful and, of course, “first, do no harm.”
And that:
In a developed society like Canada, we must advocate and protect the most vulnerable
members. Joey, and all our children deserve our thoughtful and ethical best.
Commentary ERT Case No. 14-096
By Carmen Krogh, BScPharm, May 25, 2015
Any errors or omissions are unintended
4
The World Health Organization comments it is not necessary to wait for full scientific proof
before taking action:
…where there is a reasonable possibility that public health will be damaged, action
should be taken to protect public health without awaiting full scientific proof.
World Health Organization, Guidelines for Community Noise, WHO (1999).
The Policy Interpretation Network on Children’s Health and Environment comments on the
precautionary principle:
Policies that may protect children’s health or may minimise irreversible health effects
should be implemented, and policies or measures should be applied based on the
precautionary principle, in accordance with the Declaration of the WHO Fourth
Ministerial Conference on Environment and Health in Budapest in 2004.
Report WP7 Summary PINCHE policy recommendations Policy Interpretation
Network on Children’s Health and Environment (PINCHE) Policy Interpretation
Network on Children’s Health and Environment QLK4-2002-02395
The Council of Canadian Academies Panel states in its assessment of IWT noise:
…that there is a paucity of research on sensitive populations, such as children and
infants and people affected by clinical conditions that may lead to an increased
sensitivity to sound.
Council of Canadian Academies (2015) Understanding the Evidence: Wind Turbine
Noise, The Expert Panel on Wind Turbine Noise and Human Health, Executive
Summary, Page xvii.
This raises the question whether Appellants and concerned families will be expected to wait
until children-based research demonstrates that “engaging in the Renewable Energy Project
in accordance with the Renewable Energy Approval “will cause serious harm to human
health” (“Health Test”).
If so, are there any potential legal-ethical concerns?
Respectfully,
Carmen Krogh, BScPharm
Ontario, Canada
Commentary ERT Case No. 14-096
By Carmen Krogh, BScPharm, May 25, 2015
Any errors or omissions are unintended
5
Appendix: documents provided to the ERT
1.Open Submission on Risk of Harm to Children May 15/2013
2 Open submission on Risk of Harm to Children Dec 27/2012
3 Letter from Carmen Krogh, requesting help from PM Harper and Peter Mckay Re: UN
Rights of the Child.
4 Arline L. Bronzaft, Noise from Wind Turbines: Potential health Effects on Children.
5 Welfare of Children at Risk, Due to Wind Turbines, Parents Reporting.
6 Joey Correia’s Individual Education Plan
7 Letter from Dr. Calvert, Joey’s Specialist, Regarding Sensory Processing Issues.
8 Information about Auditory Processing Disorder – From Website, KidsHealth from
Nemours
8a Letter from Retired Special Education teacher, Susan Smith, Re: Children & Wind turbines
8b Letter from School Superintendent, William C. Mulvaney
9 Brett Horner’s Open letter to health Canada, (Discontinue Ongoing Experiments)
10 Dr. Sarah Laurie’s Concerns Re: Health Canada Study
11 Ways to Improve Future Health Studies – Multi-Municipal Wind Turbine Working Group.
12 “Critique on Infrasound Study”, by Jerry Punch
13 Dr. Maria Alves-Pereira on Vibro-Acoustic Disease
14 Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine – Industrial Wind Turbines, and Health Effects.
15 Summary of 21 Peer-Reviewed Articles on Adverse Health Effects, on IWT’s.
16 Mothers Against Wind Turbines…Call for a Moratorium.
17 Open Letter/Press Release from N.A.P.A.W.
18 Victim’s Statement’s, from Wind Victims Ontario
19 Letter to PM Harper and Peter McKay, Minister of Justice
20 Letter to Dr. Murray, and Dr. Weiss.
21 Letter to Premier Kathleen Wynne, May 6
22 Letter to Premier Kathleen Wynne, Apr. 18
23 Letter to Steve Klose, M.O.E.
24 Letter to Ombudsman, Andre Marin
25 Attempts to Speak with NRWC.
26 Speeches Read at Local and Regional Councils, to Appeal for Help

Governments that Refuse to Protect Citizens, Should be Charged With Negligence!

German doctors push to halt building of wind turbines

The “parliament” of Germany’s medical profession has called on its leaders to support a halt to further wind farm developments near housing until more research has been undertaken into the possible health impacts of low-frequency noise from wind turbines.

German doctors want more research into the health effects of wind turbines. Source: AP

By Graham Lloyd, Environment Editor, Sydney

The issue was debated at the German Medical Assembly in Frankfurt on Friday and transferred to the executive board of the German Medical Association.

Association policy adviser Adrian Alexander Jakel confirmed a motion calling for ­research had been forwarded to the board “for further action”.

Germany is considered a world leader in adopting renewable ener­gy and the minutes of the Medical Assembly meeting said that, with the phase-out of nuclear power, more wind energy would be used in future. But it said the entir­e life cycle of renewable technologies, from the initial raw mater­ial supply to disposal and the planning and risk considerations, should be considered in advance.

The Medical Assembly motion said this required “scientifically sound findings of potential health effects, and a deliberate balance between benefit and validity to be able to make conscious weightings between the benefits and of the disadvantages and risks”.

“In particular regarding emissions in the low frequency and infra­sound range there are no reliab­le independent studies that investigate field measurement methodology suitable for this sound field below the threshold of hearing,” they said.

The assembly called for the federal government to close the gaps in knowledge about the health effec­ts of infrasound and low-frequenc­y sound from wind turbines through scientific research.

It said research should clarify open questions concerning meas­urement methods and, where approp­riate, adjust regulations to “allow the expansion and the operation of wind turbines wisely, carefully, with integrated expertise, sustainability and overall societal responsibility”.

It said the health effects of infra­sound (below 20 Hz) and low-frequency sound (below 100 Hz) in relation to emissions from wind turbines were “still open questions’’, as were “the effects of noise below the hearing threshold or lower frequencies with increasing exposure duration”. The assembly said the erection of more turbines close to settlements should be stopped until there was reliable data to exclude a safety hazard.

Open Letter from Carmen Krogh, Re: Health Canada Presentation at Wind Turbine Noise Conferences

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper

Prime Minister of Canada

pm@pm.gc.ca

The Honourable Rona Ambrose

Minister of Health, Health Canada

minister_ministre@hc-sc.gc.ca

M.P. Ben Lobb

Chair

House of Commons Standing Committee on Health

ben.lobb.a2@parl.gc.ca

May 14, 2015

Dear Prime Minister Harper, Hon. Minister of Health, and MP Ben Lobb,

Re: Open Letter: Health Canada Presentation at Wind Turbine Noise Conferences

The purpose of this letter is that in the interests of openness and transparency, any additional results of the Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study: Summary of Results be publicly disclosed.

Attached is a copy of the schedule relating to David Michaud, Principal Investigator of the Health Canada Study’s presentation entitled Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study: Summary of Results.[1]

The presentation took place Tuesday, April 21, 2015 during a Wind Turbine Noise Conference held in Scotland.[2] 

I am aware that David Michaud will be presenting this paper during the Acoustical Society of America meeting scheduled Thursday, May 21, 2015.[3]

The paper being presented informs new information.

In addition, I am aware a copy of the paper was available during a recent Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal.[4]

To ensure openness and transparency I respectfully urged on two occasions that the Health Canada plenary session, the Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study: Summary of Results be publicly disclosed prior to its presentation.[5],[6]

Typically, Conference registrants receive a copy; however with respect to public disclosure, I have searched Health Canada’s and other websites and am unable to locate a link to the paper presented. It is possible the link is not easily located. If the paper and media release are available publicly, please direct me to the links and advise me of the date of the postings.

Based on previous participation in several Wind Turbine Noise Conferences[7],[8] the final papers disclose the contents of a presentation. Since the paper presented by David Michaud should have conformed to requirements for submitting the paper by January 31, 2015,[9] it is expected that members of the planning committee would have had the opportunity to be informed of its contents. I note that David Michaud is a member of the Scotland Conference planning committee.

The Health Canada Study is a 2.1 million dollar publicly funded study. An issue in Ontario and other venues is that those reporting adverse health effects have not been given the opportunity to participate on various initiatives such as the Health Canada Study team and the Council of Canadian Academies (CCA) assessment. Affected neighbours, despite their appeals to the various government authorities feel they have been set aside and ignored. Industry and government is represented but not those affected.

To ensure openness and transparency I respectfully urge that the paper presented by Health Canada during the Conference be publicly disclosed.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

Carmen Krogh, BScPharm

Cell 613 312 9663

Attachments

Open Letter_Health Canada transparency and disclosure May 14 2015.pdf

Tuesday.pdf

References

[1] Wind Turbine Noise (2015), Monday 20th April to Thursday 23rd, April 2015, Glasgow, Scotland http://windturbinenoise.eu/

[2] Michaud D, PLENARY, Health Effects and Annoyance ,Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study: Summary of Results, Tuesday, April 21, 2015, http://windturbinenoise.eu/?page_id=973

[3] Acoustical Society of America, May 18 to 21, 2015, Pittsburgh Pennsylvania, Spring 2015 Meeting

Wyndham Grand Pittsburgh Downtown Hotel, Pittsburgh Pennsylvania

[4] Dingeldein v. Director, Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal, Case No. 15-011

[5] Correspondence to Prime Minister, Minister of Justice and Minister of Health March 18, 2015

[6] Correspondence to Prime Minister, Minister of Justice and Minister of Health April 4, 2015

[7] Trading off human health: Wind turbine noise and government policy Carmen ME Krogh, Joan Morris, Murray May, George Papadopoulos, Brett Horner, Paper presented at the Wind Turbine Noise conference 2013, August 28 to 30, Denver, Colorado, USA

[8] Carmen ME Krogh, Roy D Jeffery, Jeff Aramini, Brett Horner, Wind turbines can harm humans: a case study, Paper presented at Inter-noise 2012, New York City, NY

[9] Wind Turbine Noise 2015, Deadlines, Final Papers, January 31, 2015  http://windturbinenoise.eu/?page_id=363