Victims of Wind Turbines Fight for Their Right to a Peaceful Life!

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

shotgun

****

One of the great lines spun by the wind industry, its parasites and spruikers is just how much country people can’t wait to snuggle up next to a cuddly bunch of Vestas V112s (see our post here).

Apparently, life for rural communities just isn’t complete without a fleet of blade-chucking, pyrotechnic, sonic-torture devices.

The wind industry’s story goes that country folks’ currently miserable, downtrodden lives can only improve with the addition of a few hundred whirling, bat-chomping, bird slicing wonders.

The problem is, as with most wind industry bunkum, the facts soon separate from the myth.

Despite the spin-masters’ well-oiled claims about everybody simply “loving wind turbines to bits”, the truth is that there are plenty of wind farm victims who are keen to see them end up in bits; lots of little bits.

Just how keen is shown by these two stories: the first from Montana; and the next from Waubra in Victoria.

Wind turbine shot, NaturEner offering reward of $2,500
The Valierian
3 June 2015

shot turbine

****

NaturEner, which owns and operates the Glacier Wind wind farms in Glacier and Toole counties, is offering a $2,500 reward for information on the gunshot vandalism of one of its turbines.

One of the turbines located in the Glacier County portion of the Glacier Wind 2 farm was shot sometime in mid-April. The bullet punched through the outer shell of the turbine and damaged a major cable leading to the generator, causing more than $100,000 in damage.

“Whoever is responsible for this senseless act of vandalism endangered our employees, whom actually work inside the part of the turbine that was shot, and our neighbors, as well as damaging a valuable piece of renewable energy infrastructure,” said Gabriel Vaca, vice president of NaturEner. “Anyone with information about this incident should contact NaturEner and the Glacier County Sheriff.”

The turbine stopped generating power on the afternoon of April 17, and the bullet damage was discovered on April 23 by repair technicians, who reported the incident to law enforcement officials.

The intense heat caused by the power surging through the cable melted the bullet, and sheriff’s deputies have found no witnesses who saw or heard the gunshot.
The Valierian

Meanwhile, the trigger-men are just as active Downunder ….

Shots fired at Waubra wind farm
The Courier
Kara Irving
18 April 2015

shooting turbine

****

Maintenance workers have been put at risk by people shooting at Waubra wind turbines.

Acciona Australia has asked police to investigate incidents of people taking aim at its Waubra Wind Farm turbines over the last two months.

A company spokesman said shooting at the turbines posed significant safety risks for its workers.

“Acciona takes employee and contractor health and safety, as well as safety in the local community, very seriously,” a spokesman said.

“Any person that has knowledge or information that could assist in the police investigation should contact Crime Stoppers or Ballarat Police.”

The company could not confirm how many of its 128 wind turbines had been shot.

No workers, contractors or members of the public had been injured as a result of the incident.

Australian Wind Alliance national coordinator Andrew Bray said it was the first shooting incident he had heard of at wind farms.

“I have heard of incidents where people had vandalised property around the wind farms, but this is a first for me,” he said.

There had been no significant damage to the 80-metre-tall turbines as a result of the shooting.

All Waubra Wind Farm turbines have one narrow elevator and stairs for workers.

Acciona Australia opened the wind farm near the Sunraysia Highway in 2009.

The wind farm is located 35 kilometres north-west of Ballarat.

A Victoria Police spokesman said comment would not be available until Monday.

Anyone with information regarding the incident should contact Crime Stoppers.
The Courier

Andrew Bray – not the sharpest tool in the shed – appears to have a hard time connecting the fact that it takes something pretty serious to get ordinary, law-abiding citizens angry enough to start pumping lead into someone else’s property.

Bray – a highly paid wind industry spruiker – true to his gormless type – fails to see the irony in his very own dismay. For years now, in every utterance and every press release, Bray bubbles over, telling us how everyone, everywhere just can’t get enough of “free”, lovable wind energy.

And yet, at Waubra and in Montana, that “love” manifests with well directed shots from high powered rifles?!?

While Bray suggests it’s the first time he’s heard of shots being fired at wind turbines, STT has heard a few reports of Australian farmers letting loose on turbines with shots fired in frustration and anger. One shootist apparently decided to stop firing at the blades, because the holes made caused them to emit a ‘whistling’ sound, only adding to the acoustic torture.

The fact of the matter is that rural communities cannot abide these things. When asked fairly and squarely, more than 90% of threatened and effected communities are bitterly opposed:

Wind Industry Keeps Losing ‘Hearts and Minds’: Community Opposition Rolls & Builds

While only a few have taken up arms in response (so far), there’s been plenty of self-directed action from threatened and/or harmed communities around the world, which STT is happy to describe as acts of community “self-defence”:

Community Defenders Down MET Mast in Donegal, Ireland

More MET Mast Mayhem: Community Defenders Drop Mast in Fight to Save Homes near Bangor, Maine

MET Mast Mayhem: Scots Use Guerrilla Tactics to Stop These Things

Wave of Destruction: Ontario Wind Farm Neighbours in Open Revolt

These acts of desperation and frustration are perfectly understandable. For a taste of what’s driving this anger turned to action, cop an earful of what these folks are being forced to tolerate:

****

****

Collectively these actions can be characterised as a response to entrenched institutional corruption; such as the Clean Energy Regulator happily doling out $billions in RECs to wind farms that have never shown compliance with the noise conditions of their planning consents:

Australia’s Clean Energy Regulator Doles Out $Billions in Subsidies to Non-Compliant Wind Farms

Citizens are bound to react against any industry quick to destroy their lawful rights to live in and enjoy their own homes. And they’re bound to react violently when that industry is devoid of any moral compass, let alone human empathy. An industry that openly displays a callous disregard for basic human rights – such as the ability to sleep comfortably in one’s own bed – using its shills to call them “wind farm wing-nuts” and otherwise dismissing or ridiculing their wholly unnecessary suffering – as Andrew Bray and his ilk do, on a daily basis:

Thai Turbine-Terrorist, RATCH Scores Monumental “Own Goal” during Senate’s Wind Farm Inquiry

Sleep matters – and incessant turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound at night-time destroys the ability to enjoy it:

Wind Turbine Noise Deprives Farmers and Truckers of Essential Sleep & Creates Unnecessary Danger for All

If anybody in government believes that the politics of “renewables” is all about blindly favouring them, then the events outlined in this post and the posts linked above should provide pause for thought.

The warm and fluffy tag “renewables” is used to garner political support for the wind industry – but there’s a distinction between giant industrial wind turbines grinding away in the next paddock at 2 in the morning and solar panels on the house next-door. STT’s yet to hear of a case of anyone unloading their grandpa’s .303 on their neighbour’s solar panels.

Tony Abbott’s Coalition have just 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).

For thousands of people in rural communities spread out across the country that “deal” – which has been passed in the House of Reps – is seen as a betrayal, not only of their interests, but of the interests of the Nation as a whole (see our posts here and here).

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.

With rural community anger about to boil over, STT predicts that turbine target practice, and the destruction of turbines and MET masts has only just begun. Are you listening, Tony?

abbottcover

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.

This Is A Good Start, But World-Wide Reforms Needed!

Robson: Good winds blowing

Credit:  By Frank Robson, Guest Columnist | The Journal Record | May 29, 2015 | journalrecord.com ~~

I applaud the Oklahoma Legislature and Gov. Mary Fallin for implementing much-needed reform of the wind industry, addressing both excessive subsidies and lack of regulation for protection of property owners. The progress made this year is important in establishing a regulatory framework. Yet there is still work to do.

Senate Bill 808 by state Sen. Brian Bingman, R-Sapulpa, and Rep. Earl Sears, R-Bartlesville, signed by Fallin on April 17, established a 1.5-nautical-mile setback of wind turbines from schools, airports and hospitals and provides a stronger decommissioning statute that protects landowners and taxpayers from being financially responsible for taking down turbines at the end of their life. The legislation also requires notification to landowners at least six months before construction begins.

The new law doesn’t take into consideration protection of wind turbines from homes, neighborhoods, public parks and other land where natural habitat may be disturbed. We hope the Legislature will consider the need for further requirements that address reasonable restrictions on the placement of wind turbines near other areas of public safety concern.

Senate Bill 498 by state Sen. Mike Mazzei, R-Tulsa, and Sears, signed May 20, repeals the ability of the wind industry to qualify for a five-year property tax exemption. This provides a good start in addressing the magnitude of industrial wind’s subsidies and negative impact on Oklahoma’s budget.

Senate Bill 502 by state Sen. Marty Quinn, R-Claremore, and Sears, signed May 20, repeals the ability of the wind industry to qualify for the new jobs investment tax credit effective Jan. 1, 2017. This eliminates an unnecessary and potentially costly subsidy for an industry that creates few jobs here.

Wind developers may still qualify for zero-emission tax credits, which amount to $5 per megawatt-hour for all electricity produced from industrial wind facilities for 10 years. The current law saddles Oklahoma taxpayers with this burden for all wind facilities built prior to Jan. 1, 2021. Payment of subsidies under this program may extend until Dec. 31, 2030.

We look forward to continued forthright discussions with state leadership regarding the need for further safety regulations, and the need to evaluate the legitimacy of the remaining subsidies available to industrial wind. Let’s continue to make progress for the betterment of Oklahoma.

Frank Robson is a member of the Oklahoma Property Rights Association.

More Reasons To Stop the Wind Turbines!

Wind Turbine Noise Causes Greater Prairie Chicken Run

chicken run

****

Ardman Animation’s Chicken Run is a rollicking remake of WWII POW breakout favourite, The Great Escape. The tale takes place in the ‘Stalag’ of Tweedy’s Farm – minus the machine gun towers and jackboots – and comes with a feathery twist; and from a feminist perspective.

Ginger, along with her band of intrepid inmates – and a little swashbuckling help from her beau, Rocky the Rhode Island Red, plots an early exit to avoid Mrs Tweedy’s dreaded pie-maker.

In their efforts to avoid a date with a dismal destiny (and gallons of gravy) the hens crack on and build an improbable flying contraption, designed to vault the barbed wire and spirit them to freedom.

All hopes are pinned on Fowler – an ageing rooster with military pretensions, who tuts, struts and sounds every bit the RAF officer he claims to be. But when the time comes to fly the coop, Fowler’s anticipated prowess as pilot is found wanting:

Ginger: But you’re supposed to be up there – you’re the pilot.

Fowler: Don’t be ridiculous. I can’t fly this contraption.

Ginger: Back in your day? The Royal Air Force?

Fowler: 644 Squadron, Poultry Division – we were the mascots.

Ginger: You mean you never actually *flew* the plane?

Fowler: Good heavens, no! I’m a chicken! The Royal Air Force doesn’t let chickens behind the controls of a complex aircraft.

Needless to say, the ladies’ pluck, dash and derring-do prevails on Fowler, who faster that you can say “tally-ho, chocks away”, has the clumsy-craft airborne, on its way to exodus, and all on-board flying like poultry in motion.

chicken run plane

****

Now, to another story of chickens out to escape their tormentors – not malevolent manufacturers with automated pie-machines – this time it’s Greater Prairie Chickens fleeing the sonic torture of giant fans speared into the hills of Kansas.

Vulnerable grassland birds abandon mating sites near wind turbines
environmentalresearchweb
May 7, 2015

Shifting to renewable energy sources has been widely touted as one of the best ways to fight climate change, but even renewable energy can have a downside, as in the case of wind turbines’ effects on bird populations.

In a new paper in The Condor: Ornithological Applications, a group of researchers demonstrate the impact that one wind energy development in Kansas has had on Greater Prairie-Chickens (Tympanuchus cupido) breeding in the area.

Virginia Winder of Benedictine College, Andrew Gregory of Bowling Green State University, Lance McNew of Montana State University, and Brett Sandercock of Kansas State University monitored prairie-chicken leks, or mating sites, before and after turbine construction and found that leks within eight kilometers of turbines were more likely to be abandoned.

Leks are sites at which male prairie-chickens gather each spring to perform mating displays and attract females. The researchers visited 23 leks during the five-year study to observe how many male birds were present and to record the body mass of trapped males.

After wind turbine construction, they found an increased rate of lek abandonment at sites within eight kilometers of the turbines as well as a slight decrease in male body mass. Lek abandonment was also more likely at sites where there were seven or fewer males and at sites located in agricultural fields instead of natural grasslands.

This paper is the latest in a series of studies on the effects of wind energy development on prairie-chickens. “To me, what is most interesting about our results is that we are now able to start putting different pieces of our larger project together to better understand the response of Greater Prairie-Chickens to wind energy development at our field site,” says study co-author Virginia Winder. “We have found that both male and female prairie-chickens have negative behavioral responses to wind energy development.

The data we collected to monitor this response have also allowed us new insights into the ecology of this species. For example, lek persistence at our study site depended not only on distance to turbine, but also male numbers and habitat.”

The findings of this study reinforce the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recommendation that no new wind energy development should be done within an eight-kilometer buffer around active lek sites. “It is critical to have rigorous evaluations of direct and indirect effects of wind energy facilities on species such as prairie-chickens,” according to grassland wildlife management expert Larkin Powell, who was not involved with the research. “The potential for trade-offs between renewable energy and wildlife populations on the landscape is one of the key questions of our day.”
environmentalresearchweb

The full paper is available here:http://www.aoucospubs.org/doi/full/10.1650/CONDOR-14-98.1

turbines giant

****

Sure, it’s possible that these plucky little Kansan ground dwellers aren’t happy with the impact on the aesthetics of their neighbourhood, from hundreds of whirling wonders towering over 160m in height.

However, the fact that these birds have voted with their feet – abandoning their nesting sites within 8 km of the turbines – and, after 5 years, still refuse to return to them – suggests that their distaste isn’t driven by disdain for the hideous look of these things.

That birds – unused to communicating in English – should take flight in order to avoid the daily torment thrown up by these things suggests forces at work way beyond the wind industry’s favoured “nocebo” defence.

The Prairie Chicken’s self-imposed 8 km turbine exclusion zone has an eerily familiar ring to it. It’s the same sort of distance from turbines that has humans – living within that range – troubled by incessant infrasound invading their homes, causing sleep disturbance and otherwise annoying the hell out of them (unless they too, like the Prairie Chickens of Kansas, haven’t already left their homes for good).

At Waterloo in South Australia, Professor Colin Hansen and his team from Adelaide University found turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound annoying families in homes out to 8.7 km from turbines:

“Unscheduled” Wind Farm Shut-Down Shows Low-Frequency Noise Impact at Waterloo, SA

While it could be that Greater Prairie Chickens have cut and run from wind turbines because they’re “climate denying, anti-wind, wing-nuts”; or that they’re part of a BIG COAL backed conspiracy, the more plausible explanation is that these feathered little fellas just can’t stand incessant turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound.

No doubt the wind industry, its parasites and spruikers will invent some tale in an effort to explain the great Prairie Chicken Run. In the meantime, wherever fans get speared, it’s every chicken for themselves.

Greater_Prairie-Chickens

Windweasels Still Trying To Deny the Harm They are Causing!

Wind-farm workers suffer poor sleep, international studies find

Environment Editor
Sydney
Turbines ‘terrible for shut-eye’

Two studies have linked sleep disturbance of wind-farm workers to low-frequency noise and infra­sound from wind turbines. Source: Supplied

Two international studies have linked sleep disturbance and health effects of wind-farm workers to low-frequency noise and infra­sound from wind turbines.

A study of 45 people in three groups by Tehran University ­researchers said: “Despite all the good benefits of wind turbines … this technology has health risks for all those exposed to its sound.”

The study paper said it was the first to examine the effect of wind turbine noise on sleep disorders in workers who are closer to turbines and exposed to higher levels of noise. The Manjil wind farm was examined because it had more staff and turbines than other farms in Iran.

“The results showed that there was a positive and significant relationship between age, workers’ experience, equivalent sound level, and the level of sleep disorder,” the paper said.

The paper, published in next month’s Fluctuation and Noise Letters journal, said more research was needed to confirm the results.

In another study, researchers at Ibaraki University in Japan measured the brainwaves of 15 wind-farm workers listening to recordings of low-frequency and infrasound from wind turbines.

In a paper published in the International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, the researchers said brain function measured by EEG tests showed the turbine sounds were “considered to be an annoyance to the technicians who work in close proximity to a modern large-scale wind turbine”.

Brain measurements showed test subjects could not stay relaxed after hearing the sound stimulus at the frequency band of 20 hertz. Brainwaves indicating a “strain state” were noted.

Possible health effects from low-frequency noise and infrasound is controversial worldwide.

Clean Energy Council policy director Russell Marsh said Australia’s leading health research body, the National Health and Medical Research Council, had held several reviews of the relationship between wind turbines and health and found “no consistent evidence” wind farms caused adverse health effects in humans.

“Leading national organisations such as the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Association of Acoustical Consultants have said there is not enough infrasound produced by wind farms to have a negative ­effect on humans living near wind farms,” he said.

Australia already had some of the strictest regulations for wind farms, and the council believed further research would reinforce that wind energy was one of the safest and cleanest forms of energy generation.

Windpushers Tell Many Lies, to Achieve Their Nasty Goals…

Hammering Wind Industry Myths: the ‘In-a-Nutshell’ Version

Facts

****

Here’s a sold little wrap-up on the great wind power fraud from Mary Kay Barton – it’s so clear and thumpingly sound for STT to add, would only detract. Hats off, Mary. Over to you.

Wind energy myths spun by lobbyists and salesmen
Principia Scientific
Mary Kay Barton
13 May 2015

Industrial wind energy is a net loser: economically, environmentally, technologically and civilly.

A recent letter in my local paper by American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) representative Tom Vinson is typical of wind industry sales propaganda. It deserves correction.

This is the reality:  Industrial wind energy is a NET LOSER – economically, environmentally, technically and civilly. Let’s examine how.

Economically:

New York State (NYS) has some of the highest electricity rates in the United States – a whopping 53% above the national average. This is due in large part to throwing hundreds of billions of our taxpayer and ratepayer dollars into the wind. High electricity costs drive people and businesses out of the state, and ultimately hurt poor families the most.

A NYS resident using 6,500 kWh of electricity annually will pay about $400 per year more for their electricity than if our electricity prices were at the national average. That’s over $3.2 BILLION dollars annually that will not be spent in the rest of the state economy.

Why destroy entire towns, when just one single 450-MW gas-fired combined-cycle generating unit located near New York City (NYC) – where the power is needed – operating at only 60% of its capacity, would provide more electricity than all of NYS’s wind factories combined.

Furthermore, that one 450 MW gas-fired unit would only require about one-fourth of the capital costs – and would not bring all the negative civil, economic, environmental, human health and property value impacts that are caused by the sprawling industrial wind factories. Nor would it require all the additional transmission lines to NYC.

The Institute for Energy Research tallied the numbers and found that each wind job costs $11.45 million and costs more than four jobs that are lost elsewhere in the economy, because of all the subsidies and the resulting “skyrocketing” cost of electricity. In fact, on a unit of production basis, wind is subsidized over 52 times more than conventional ‘fossil’ fuels.

In the United Kingdom, David Cameron has finally awakened to the folly of wasting billions on the failed technology of wind. He recently declared, “We will scrap funds for wind farms.”

Environmentally:

According to the AWEA, the USA has some 45,100 Industrial Wind Turbines (IWTs). Remotely sited IWTs are located far from urban centers where the power is needed. This requires a spider web of new transmission lines (at ratepayers’ expense), which exponentially adds to the needless bird and bat deaths caused by IWTs themselves.

Additionally, sprawling industrial wind factories cause massive habitat fragmentation, which is cited as one of the main reasons for species decline worldwide.

Studies show MILLIONS of birds and bats are being slaughtered annually by these giant “Cuisinarts of the sky,” as a Sierra official dubbed IWTs in a rare moment of candor.

Governor Cuomo’s environmental hypocrisy is also worth noting. Cuomo is supporting “dimming the lights” in New York City to help stop migrating birds from becoming disoriented and crashing into buildings. Yet simultaneously, Cuomo is pushing for many more giant bird-chopping wind turbines – with 600-foot-high blinking red lights, along the shores of Lake Ontario (a major migratory bird flyway), and across rural New York State.

Technically:

Because wind provides NO capacity value, or firm capacity (specified amounts of power on demand), wind requires constant “shadow capacity” from our reliable, dispatchable baseload generators to cover for wind’s inherent volatile, skittering flux on the grid.  Therefore, wind cannot replace those conventional generation sources.  Instead, wind locks us into dependence on fossil fuels – and represents a redundancy (two duplicate sources of electricity), which Big Wind CEO Patrick Jenevein admitted “turns ratepayers and taxpayers into double-payers for the same product.”

The list of accidentsblade failures (throwing debris over a half mile), fires (ten times more than the wind industry previously admitted) and other problems is updated quarterly at a website in the UK. This lengthy and growing list is evidence of why giant, moving machines do NOT belong anywhere near where people live.

Even the AWEA admits that the life of a typical wind turbine is only 10 to 13 years (January 2006: North American Wind Power). This is substantiated by studies on these short-lived lemons.

Adding insult to injury, the actual output of all of New York State’s wind factories combined has been averaging a pathetic 23 percent.  If IWTs were cars, they would have been correctly dubbed ‘lemons’ and relegated to the junkyard a long time ago.

Civilly:

The only thing that has ever been reliably generated by industrial wind is complete and utter civil discord. Neighbor is pitted against neighbor, and even family member against family member. Sprawling industrial wind factories have totally divided communities, which is already apparent in towns across NYS and the country.  It is the job of good government to foresee and prevent this kind of civil discord – not to promote it.

Regarding human health, NYS officials admitted at a 2009 NYSERDA meeting on wind that they knew “infrasound” from wind turbines was a problem worldwide. The growing list of problems globally highlights that these problems are only getting worse.

At the NYSERDA meeting, a former noise control engineer for the New York State Public Service Commission, Dr. Dan Driscoll, testified that ‘infrasound’ (sounds below 20 Hz) are sounds you can’t hear, but the body can feel.

Dr. Driscoll said that ‘infrasound’ is NOT blocked by walls, and it can very negatively affect the human body – especially after prolonged, continuous exposure.  He said symptoms include headache, nausea, sleeplessness, dizziness, ringing in the ears and other maladies.

NYS Department of Health official Dr. Jan Storm testified that, despite knowing the global nature of the “infrasound” problem, NYS still had not done any health studies (despite having federal money available to do so). Here we are sixyears later, and indefensibly, NYS officials still have not called for any independent studies to assure the protection of New York State citizens.

“The Golden Rule,” as espoused by Rotary International’s excellent ‘Four-Way Test’ of the things we think, say and do, should be the moral and ethical standard our public servants aspire to uphold.  The test asks:

1.      Is it the truth?

2.      Is it fair to all concerned?

3.      Will it build goodwill and better friendships?

4.      Will it be beneficial to all concerned?

When applied to the industrial wind issue, the answers are a resounding, “NO!”
Principia Scientific

turbine fire

Turkish Court has the Decency to Protect Residents from Wind Turbine Noise!

Turkish Court Shuts Down 50 Turbines: Yaylaköy Residents Delighted at 1st Chance to Sleep in Years

turk1

****

One of the myths pedalled by Australia’s self-appointed wind farm noise, sleep and health ‘expert’ (a former tobacco advertising guru) is that the known and obvious adverse health impacts from incessant turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound are a cooked-up “phenomenon”, exclusive to the English speaking world. Trouble with that little tale is that’s been scotched by the Danes:

Vestas’ Danish Victims Lay Out the FACTS

Denmark Calls Halt to More Wind Farm Harm

And the Germans:

German Medicos Demand Moratorium on New Wind Farms

And the Tawainese:

Winning Taiwanese Hearts and Minds?

And, now the Turks. As this article lays out – in terms so simple, that even tobacco advertising gurus should be capable of understanding them.

50 operating wind turbines stopped by the court!
BurGün
18 May 2015

turk2

****

The Administrative Court in Ankara has ruled that fifty operating wind turbines in Karaburun be stopped. The locals of Yaylaköy, Karaburun are delighted with the court decision. It is 20 days since the wind turbines stopped working.

From the beginning of the struggle to protect their village from the adverse affects from the Wind Power Plants that are spreading all over the peninsula, the local people have finally received good news.

The Administrative Court, ruled in April that even if fifty wind turbines are already operating, the activities have to be halted since the environmental damage is irreversible. First an EIA report will have to be issued. The wind turbine company’s request to continue to run their turbines meanwhile, was also denied by the court.

‘THE FIRST DECISION’

The lawyer Cem Altiparmak said the decision would be a first in the country. Mr. Altiparmak states that there are very few court cases related to renewable energy.

In this area the law is insufficient, there are no precedents, so we have to live it to get experience. “A number of license revocation proceedings have started in our country. Our court ruling is one of the first and will have an impact on up-coming cases.

What has happened?

İzmir Governorship Provincial Directorate of Environment and Urban Development, had issued a “EIA Not Required” to install 166 MW in the Karaburun Peninsula.

8 years later when EMRA issued a new license for another 50 turbines to the same company leaning on the same “EIA Not Required” document, the residents of Yaylaköy and the environmental movement Karaburun City Council sued EMRA – The Energy Market Regulatory Authority.

The court ruled that this is against the law and if allowed to operate the damages will irreversible therefore all operations have to be stopped until an EIA investigation has been performed.

The court decision has given hope to the local people as well as other people in Cesme, Bodrum, Datca and Urla where wind turbines projects are being planned without any public consultation. All these projects have been issued with an EIA Not Required”.

Hopefully this Wind turbine project will not be able to operate again and for the first time in years the people in Yaylaköy are able to sleep comfortably and we will continue to work for that, says one man from the village.
BurGün

turk3

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