More Negative Critiques on Health Canada Study! It was a farce!

Report avoids wind turbine health woes

Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise “Statistics” Avoid Real Health Problems

Tim Matheson (Nov. 11, 2014) tells us he has had enough of wind turbine health effects. I am sure that the many people living near Ontario’s wind turbines who are still suffering from pounding in the chest and head, dizziness, headaches, ringing in the ears and sleep deprivation have had enough too. However, the serious inaccuracies in Mr. Matheson’s letter must not go without comment. It is entirely untrue, as he claims, that “every peer-reviewed study world-wide has consistently shown the same” as the Health Canada key findings.

Our Grey-Bruce Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Hazel Lynn found 18 peer-reviewed studies that “provide reasonable evidence . . . that an association exists between wind turbines and distress in humans”. Instead of disparaging Dr. Lynn we should admire and respect her for taking the trouble to listen to her constituents and speaking the truth. The Brown County (Wisconsin) Board of Health has taken the growing peer-reviewed evidence seriously enough to declare its industrial wind turbines a “public health nuisance” and a “human health hazard for all people (residents, workers, visitors, and sensitive passers-by) who are exposed to Infrasound/Low Frequency Noise and other emissions potentially harmful to human health”.

There are now dozens of peer-reviewed acoustical and medical research reports that contradict the key findings of the Health Canada study (which has not been peer-reviewed) warning that wind turbines, have a significant potential to cause adverse impacts on the people living nearby. Krough et al (2011), Shepherd (2011), Phillips, (2011), Hanning &. Evans (2012), Nissenbaum (2012), Walker (2012), Ambrose (2012), James (2013), Cooper, (2013), Schomer (2013), Enbom (2013); Kugler 2014, are just a few of the more recent ones.

So how did Health Canada manage to come up with findings so out of line with much of the most recent peer-reviewed research? Could this industry-led, government-supported study have been intended to pacify growing public concern and promote federal government policy– its “Wind Technology Roadmap”?

Already, epidemiologists, physicians and scientists have pointed out grave shortcomings and inconsistencies with the study’s conclusions as well as gaps and errors in methodology.

  • Contradictions and biases affect its credibility. Unmentioned in the key findings: “The study did find wind turbine noise to be “statistically related to severalself-reported health effects including blood pressure, migraines, tinnitus, dizziness, and disturbed sleep”. — Epidemiologist Joan Morris, Robarts Research Institute, London, Ontario.
  • The noise “measurements” were in fact only “calculations”, “estimates” and “assumptions”, based on “predictive modeling” obtained from the turbine manufacturers. “It is known that calculated turbine noise is a poor predictor of measured turbine noise. There are other variables that influence the actual turbine noise such as wind-speed gradient, turbulence, upwind or downwind of the wind turbine, [and] temperature gradient. An average has no meaning”. —Dr. John Harrison, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Queen’s University.
  • The low responder rate of only 1234 out of the 2004 dwellings selected “could easily compromise the validity of any conclusions drawn by the researchers as a result of selection bias”. — Denise Wolfe, professional auditor for drug trial analysis.
  • Only 20% of the homes studied were “near” turbines; 434 dwellings were excluded as “not valid” (without follow up) because people were not at home, had abandoned their houses, or been bought out—possibly the ones most likely to report serious health effects.
  • Homes up to 10 kilometres away were included, diluting the results from those nearby. “The choice of the circle size plays a major role in the result obtained and speaks volumes about the motivation of the author”.  — Dr. Alex Salt, Professor of Otolaryngology at Washington University School of Medicine.

No, Mr. Matheson, the wind turbines did not shut down coal-fired generation. Nuclear units back on line, decreased consumption, and new natural gas plants (another fossil fuel) made it possible. When fossil-fuelled back-up is factored in, there are no appreciable CO2 savings from wind energy. Meanwhile, consumer subsidies for renewables in Ontario are pushing up hydro costs at an alarming rate, forcing more manufacturers (and jobs) to leave the province.

Canadian taxpayers will not be pleased to learn that Health Canada has spent over $2 million of our money without first making professional clinical observations based on the histories of actual sufferers.

                                                                                                                        Keith Stelling, Southampton

References:

Ambrose S.E, Rand, R.W (December 2011), Adverse Health Effects Produced By Large Industrial

Wind Turbines Confirmed, The Bruce McPherson Infrasound and Low Frequency Noise Study.

Arra I, Lynn H, Barker K, et al. (2014-05-23 11:51:41 UTC) Systematic Review 2013: Association

Between Wind Turbines and Human Distress. Cureus 6(5): e183. doi:10.7759/cureus.183.

Bray W and James R. (2011). “Dynamic measurements of wind turbine acoustic signals, employing sound quality engineering methods considering the time and frequency sensitivities of human perception”. Proceedings of Noise-Con 2011, Portland, Oregon, 25-27 July 2011. Curran Associates, 2011.

Cooper, S. The Measurement of Infrasound and Low Frequency Noise for Wind Farms (amended version). 5th International Conference On Wind Turbine Noise Denver 28-30 August 2013. Steven Cooper The Acoustic Group Pty Ltd, Sydney, NSW, 2040.

Enbom H & Enbom I (2013) “Infrasound from wind turbines: An overlooked health hazard,”

Läkartidningen, vol. 110 pp. 1388-89.

Hanning C & Evans A (2012) “Wind turbine noise”, British Medical Journal 344, e1527.

James R. Opening Statement Nov 18, 2013 hearing. BluEarth Project, Bull Creek, Alberta.

Krogh C, Gillis L,  N. Kouwen N, and Aramini J. (2011) “WindVOiCe, a self-reporting survey: adverse health effects, industrial wind turbines and the need for vigilance monitoring.” Bull. Sci. Tech. Soc. 31 334-339.

Kugler K, Wiegrebe L, Grothe B, Kössl M, Gürkov R, Krause E, Drexl M. 2014 Low-frequency sound

affects active micromechanics in the human inner ear. R. Soc. open sci. 1: 140166.

Nissenbaum M, Armani J & Hanning D. (2012) “Effects of industrial wind turbine noise on sleep and health”, Noise and Health 14, 237-243.

Phillips C. (2011) “Properly interpreting the epidemiologic evidence about the health effects of industrial wind turbines on nearby residents”, Bull. Sci. Tech. Soc. 31 303-315.

Salt, Alec N. and Lichtenhan, Jeffery T. “How Does Wind Turbine Noise Affect People? The many ways by which unheard infrasound and low-frequency sound from wind turbines could distress people living nearby are described”. Acoustics Today, A publication of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 10, Issue 1, Winter, 2014.

Statement Re: Health Canada’s Study of Wind Turbine Noise, and Health

November 10, 2014
Dear Prime Minister Harper, Hon. Minister of Health, Hon. Minister of Justice and AttorneyGeneral and members of the Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study,

On November 6, 2014 Health Canada posted on their website “Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study: Summary of Results”.

We have been contacted by individuals from around the world who have expressed concern over content and the quality of this Health Canada web posting.

Please find attached our comments for your consideration.

“Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study: Summary of Results” states:

“WTN annoyance was found to be statistically related to several self-reporting health effects including, but not limited to, blood pressure, migraines, tinnitus, dizziness, scores on the PSQI, and perceived stress” as well as related to “measured hair cortisol, systolic and diastolic blood pressure.”

These findings are additional evidence which support the health effects “conclusively demonstrated from exposure to wind turbine noise” identified by Health Canada and disclosed by the Honourable Rona Ambrose in a June 30, 2009 letter.

In the upcoming weeks and months, it is our intention to release a series of commentaries and disclose information on the“Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study: Summary of Results” and the Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study.

In the meantime we have compiled the following relevant information to help inform those interested in Health Canada’s Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study.

Health Canada has reportedly spent over 2 years and 1.8 million dollars to report findings which further support the conclusion that if placed too close to residents wind turbines can harm humans.

It is now time that Health Canada fulfill its stated responsibilities and take definitive action to protect Canadians exposed to wind turbine noise and help them maintain and improve their health.

Please look forward to our future series of commentaries and information on the “Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study: Summary of Results” and the Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise Study.

Respectfully submitted,
Carmen Krogh, BScPharm
Brett Horner, BA CMA
Ontario, Canada

Personal disclosure: We declare no potential conflicts of interest and have received no financial support with respect to the research and authorship of this commentary.
Attachment: Industry Led Government Supported_November 10 2014_Release FINAL

Wind Turbine Noise, is Indeed, Harmful to Human Health!

Wind Turbine Noise a “Hazard to Human Health”: Alan Jones interviews Dr Jay Tibbetts

warning_health-hazard-405x300

Last month we brought you the story of how the Shirley Wisconsin wind energy project was declared a human health hazard. Now we share this interview with Alan Jones from 2GB with the Vice-President of the Board of Health, Dr. Jay Tibbetts, where they discuss why the Medical Board had no choice but to declare the wind energy facility a human health hazard – not only to the community, but also to visitors and even a hazard to the health of passers-by.

263977-alan-jones

Alan Jones

Alan has a little radio show that more than just a few Australians tune into each morning. Syndicated through over 77 Stations and with close to 2 million listeners Countrywide – AJ as he’s known – is one of those people that leads the political charge on many issues that really affect ordinary Australians and which the rest of the press ignore.

You can listen to the audio or read the transcript below.

Alan Jones AO: Just changing direction here, because to most people listening to the program, I suppose, right now, although not people west of the Great Dividing Range – this tends to be fundamentally meaningless. When you talk about wind power. And of course all this debate about renewable energy targets. And we know that they’e pushing up the price of power. We know that they’re driving businesses offshore. We know that you are finding and you are writing to me that your electricity bill going through the roof. We are losing our international competitive advantage because we used to have the cheapest energy in the world and now we’ve demonised coal fired power and run like lunatics to embrace wind power and solar power.

But of course if wind power was not injurious to health, why wouldn’t we put the turbines where the wind is, in Parramatta Road all Macquarie Street, or on Bondi Beach or in Pennsylvania Avenue? We have a Federal Energy Minister Macfarlane, who cares nothing about the issues which drive from wind power. Indeed he sent a letter to Coalition members, Senators and staff recently which said: “Please find attached and below a standard letter in response to renewable energy target queries”. That is the argument that these targets should be abolished. And this is what he has told them. “The renewable energy sector should have greater clarity. By removing the need for a review of the target every two years, this proposal” – and he outlines some rubbish – “would ensure a doubling of new large scale and new small-scale renewable energy production under the renewable energy target scheme between now and 2020. In short, there will be more new renewable energy installed over the next six years of the renewable energy target than has been installed in the first 14 years of the scheme.” Well that will get him a job when he doesn’t stand at the next election with one of these companies on a big salary. But in other words more wind turbines and your electricity bill goes higher and higher.

What about the health consequences? Dr Michael Crawford is the director of the Waubra Foundation. They’ve been trying to alert government to health risks of wind power. They wrote very recently to Prime Minister Abbott, October 30, part of the letter says,

“The Australian government’s policies and practices in relation to wind farms are devastating many rural families through prolonged sleep deprivation and other health impacts”.

The letter says, “prolonged sleep deprivation is recognised as torture by the United Nations and thus all Australian public officials are prohibited from causing it by section 274.2 of the Australian Criminal Code. The Clean Energy Regulator public officials may face primary liability, under section 274 of the Criminal Code Act, for failing to avert situations which amount to torture by continuing to issue renewable energy certificates, for developments where persisting sleep deprivation has been reported”.

The letter goes on, the UN committee against torture explains why sleep deprivation is torture and they quote – this letter has gone to the Prime Minister –

“Sleep deprivation can cause impaired memory, and cognitive functioning, decreased short-term memory, speech impairment, hallucinations, psychosis, lowered immunity, headaches, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, stress, anxiety and depression”.

This is a UN committee. The letter to the Prime Minister said, of October 30 this year,

“The harm is being done to Australians with the complicity of the Australian government agencies, and apparently with the knowledge and acquiescence of ministers in your government. The problem is not a matter of wind farms per se, it is about where they are built in relation to people and how they are operated with respect to harmful noise generation. Current siting and operational decisions are based on maximising revenue for developers …”

foreign developers, I might add,

“… while ignoring and denying or downplaying the harm being done to people. In other words, torture is being done for profit”.

I would have thought that’s a pretty serious letter. Serious allegations.

What does our AMA say, the Australian Medical Association? “The available Australian and international evidence does not support the view that the infra …” – it’s run by a left-winger by the way, the AMA now – constantly criticising the Abbott government, but it says, “the available Australian and international evidence does not support the view that the infra-sound or low-frequency sound generated by wind farms, as they’re currently regulated in Australia, causes adverse health effects on populations residing in their vicinity.” And it goes on – the AMA.

I have a file here which you couldn’t jump over, of dreadful, dreadful letters from you people listening. I’ll just give you one. This is a woman who wrote to me, she is right next to a wind farm.

“Early this morning at 12

– this is awful –

12:30 AM, I woke suddenly to an excruciating pain in the muscle above my elbow on my left arm. I was lying on my right side. I hadn’t slept. The pain was enormous. I got out of bed. I went back to bed and the left arm pulsating with pain. At 5:45 AM I woke again. The sound of intermittent ring, like a distant bell and my body felt sore. When I got out of bed, my body was stiff and sore. Aching around my kidneys, and hips and back. The last episode has just reduce me to tears and today I’ve just had enough. I don’t want to have to leave my beautiful farm in a pine box. This is my home. This is my life. I am so frightened about what’s happening to me as in long-term damage to my health.”

Now I have letters like these a mile long. “I wonder” … – one woman wrote to a newspaper down in Victoria dismissing the concerns about wind energy and health. And a woman wrote, a mother,

“I wonder if Jo Smith,

that’s the woman who wrote the letter,

would be quite so cocky if she’d spent the last few nights sleeping to the east of the Macarthur wind farm. If she came and talked to us she’d hear of our sleep disrupted nights, because of the noise is incessant and debilitating. When you try to block it out it comes through the pillow. She’d learn that there are nights when the noise is heard above the television. She might feel sympathy for those who suffer headaches and nausea which began after the turbines started turning. There are people at least 5 km away who are feeling the effects and suffering sleep deprivation. Not every night is as bad, but this week’s been awful. This morning we drove our son to Tulamarine. We were all wide awake about 2.30, we couldn’t go back to sleep. I had a fitful two hours of sleep prior to that. In total I had about two hours sound sleep. How safe are we driving on the roads if we’re sleep deprived?”

The letters go on. There is a mile of them.

“I arrived home this afternoon from a couple of days respite from Macarthur wind factory to see all the turbines turned off at 4:30 PM. I thought great, no infra-sound. When I walked into my home it felt quiet and peaceful. The air was clear. At 6:15, I was at my computer and I thought a large truck was coming down my driveway. I had to stop what I was doing and listen for a moment to work out what was going on. The noise was horrendous. The rumbling and rattling and thumping and banging – and for a moment I wasn’t sure what it was. I drove down to the corner and saw the turbines turning. That was what the ruckus was about. They were all being turned on again. Since then and now at 8:55 PM I felt as though I could jump out of my skin or go a round with a punching bag. My muscles are tight and electric. I feel as though I want to release this enormous energy. The air in the house is electric. My body is vibrating. My voice is even vibrating when I speak. Now I know how the prisoners felt in the war when Germany used infra-sound to torture them. This is what it must’ve been like. To send them mad. To scramble their brains. To render them helpless. This is infra-sound.

You know it.

I know it.

And my independent acoustician knows it.

Turn the turbines off at night so we can get a good nights sleep. Do the decent thing if that’s possible.”

Letters everywhere. Letters everywhere.

Well Dr Jay Tibbetts is a practising physician – a member of the Brown County Board of Health. A medical advisor to the Brown County Health Department in Wisconsin, America.

He has been alerted to the position of the Australian Medical Association and has called them ‘misguided’.

He has indicated that over the last few years his Board, the Brown County Board of Health, has studied the deleterious effects of wind turbines on human health and has found that they constitute ‘\”a human health hazard” for “residents, workers, visitors and passers by”. In other words, this is coal seam gas all over again. Shove them up and don’t worry about them. Dr Tibbetts has written to the AMA about its stance. Not only does Dr Tibbetts have the US study to fall back on, he’s well-informed in terms of the Australian perspective. And basically Brown County Board members in the State of Wisconsin in America have declared wind turbines a public health risk*. Dr Jay Tibbetts is on the line from Wisconsin. Dr Tibbetts thank you for your time.

Jay Tibbetts MD:  Thank you Alan and good morning Australia and Sydney.

Alan Jones AO: What do you make of all of this, it’s astonishing isn’t it, that political leaders can ignore that kind of on-the-ground, at-the-coalface evidence?

Jay Tibbetts MD:  Well that is the problem and as you said, it’s political, or at least a lot of it is. And it has to do with jobs and things that we don’t have a lot of control over at this time.

Alan Jones AO:  I mean you have this Shirley wind farm near the town of Glenmore. Duke Energy Renewables. Three families have had to move out of their homes rather than endure physical illness. And your Health Department is the statutory authority for licensing, for inspection and for enforcement. What does that mean for wind farms where you are?

Jay Tibbetts MD:  Well, this is a whole new territory. As you said, we have authority over facilities, specifically food establishments and so on, but the utility is a different thing. However we have a situation where we are really – we have no option but to declare this a human health hazard under Section 38 of the Public Health Nuisance Ordinance of Brown County. And I just want to read to you the section that we used that’s section B under 38.01,

“A human health hazard means a substance, activity or condition that is known to have the potential to cause acute or chronic illness or death if exposure to the substance, activity or condition is not abated”.

Now, you know there’s no question in my mind, nor is there any question in the Brown County Board of Health’s mind, that this fits the description of a human health hazard.

Alan Jones AO:  Yes, I mean, you have got on-the-ground evidence. I mean I read about a fellow called Darren Ashley, Darrell Ashley who lives within a mile of turbines there. He said his wife moved out of the house for several months until her symptoms disappeared. She has since moved back and the symptoms have returned. He said,

“I am getting worse and I can’t afford to move out. I’m just getting weaker. My legs, my back, my feet. My concentration is gone. Head pressure, earaches, headaches, it just goes on and on”.

How can government ignore this?

Jay Tibbetts MD: Well that’s the big question. And again it’s a political issue and it’s how we get to the authorities that we need to and unless there is enough of a cage rattle, things are not going to get done. I think right now we kind of poked a hole in a hornet’s nest and we’re going to hopefully make some progress here.

Alan Jones AO:   I mean the UN Committee Against Torture says – we are talking about sleep deprivation here – I’ve got a file that you couldn’t jump over. About these desperate people writing to me to say that you’re the only person we can talk to who’s prepared to listen. The UN committee against torture says sleep deprivation can cause impaired memory and cognitive functioning, decreased short-term memory, speech impairment, hallucinations, psychosis, lowered immunity, headaches, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, stress, anxiety and depression. I mean all these things are related to me by the people who write to me, living within the vicinity of wind turbines.

Jay Tibbetts MD: Well that’s very true and yes, we have in our community, we distributed an informational letter to all the physicians in our community, in the County of Brown. And amazingly one large clinic refused to share the information with its providers because they had questions about whether any of these issues are really true.

Alan Jones AO:  Well that’s right, I mean the letter that was written here, to the Prime Minister, was referred to the Minister for Industry and Energy, rather than the Minister for Health!

Jay Tibbetts MD: Yes.

Alan Jones AO:  What!

Jay Tibbetts MD: Well what does that tell you?

Alan Jones AO:  What does that tell you? I mean, our Coalition here, the Abbott Coalition made an election promise – before the election last year, to ensure that research recommended ‘as a priority’ – multidisciplinary research – would be conducted into this issue, but of course the wind power industry have lobbied the government – nothing has happened. And these people write and complain – where on earth do we go to get health justice for these people?

Jay Tibbetts MD:  Well I want to correct one thing – we declared it a human health hazard (*not a risk).

Alan Jones AO:   Hazard.

Jay Tibbetts MD:  I interpret a risk being something you could take and not take. These people have no option. They live in an area that is a human health hazard.

gpgwindturbines026

Alan Jones AO:   Good on you.

Jay Tibbetts MD: So they don’t have any option.

You asked, where we go from here. I think the best thing is, right now, to use some of the information that Rick James has given us. He states that:

“wind turbines produce infrasound at significant levels where an indicator is a human health response”.

His conclusion is, based on the above,

“it’s reasonable to conclude that the adverse health effects reported by members of the Shirley community are linked to the operation of the Shirley wind project turbines. While there may be debate about the precise mechanism that causes these sounds to induce the symptoms, it is clear from this study and others conducted in different parts of the world by other acousticians, that acoustic energy emitted by the operation of modern, utility scale wind turbines is at the root of adverse health effects”.

Now his solution, if you will,

“following the precautionary principle, it is concluded that the operation of Shirley wind project is exposing the community members to acoustic energy that can be linked to the reported adverse health effects. It’s similar to other historical problems and other infrasound sources. And the only method available to protect the community’s health, is not to operate the wind turbines close to homes.

Alan Jones AO:  That’s it, that’s it.

Jay Tibbetts MD: For that to occur, either the utility must terminate operations, or it should operate a buffer zone – which you and I and everybody else knows does not exist in this point in time – between the wind turbines and the closest residential properties.  Rick …

Alan Jones AO:   That’s it, that’s it. Yes but – sorry just interrupting- earlier this year – so you’re talking about that survey – earlier this year, the Irish Department of Health, the Chief Medical officer warned in Ireland, that

“people who live near wind turbines risked having their health and psychological well-being compromised”.

And the Irish Examiner newspaper reported that following a review of research on the effects of wind turbine noise on human health, the deputy chief medical officer said

“there is a consistent cluster of symptoms related to wind turbine syndrome which occurs in a number of people in the vicinity of industrial wind turbines”.

And they called the wind turbine syndrome:

“a condition suffered by people living within earshot of the noise made by wind turbine blades as they spin around”.

Now if it weren’t a risk, why not put them on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington?

Jay Tibbetts MD:  Well of course – then you have the option of avoiding them.

Alan Jones AO:  Yes. Just Amazing.

Jay Tibbetts MD: These people don’t have that option.

Alan Jones AO:  No option at all.

Jay Tibbetts MD:  They’re living in this stew, if you will.

Alan Jones AO:  Yes, human health hazard – a stew, a stew.

Jay Tibbetts MD:  That’s exactly what the motion was – a human health hazard.

Alan Jones AO: Good on you. Good to talk to you. And thank you for your time and we may need to talk again.

Jay Tibbetts MD:  Very well, and we will certainly be available to do it any time.

Alan Jones AO:  There he is Dr Jay Tibbetts, the Vice President of the Brown County Health Board in Wisconsin. They’ve declared wind turbines a human health hazard. We’re asking poor Australians, defenceless Australians, to just cop it. And in Canberra, Macfarlane and Co. They write to the Prime Minister, and the letter gets to the Department of Energy, the Minister of Energy, not the Minister for Health.
2GB

For a detailed discussion on the Brown County Board of Health’s declaration that:

“To declare the Industrial Wind Turbines in the Town of Glenmore, Brown County. WI. a Human Health Hazard for all people (residents, workers, visitors, and sensitive passersby) who are exposed to Infrasound/Low Frequency Noise and other emissions potentially harmful to human health.” – see our post here.

The impacts of turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound are known and obvious to those unfortunates living in what have become sonic torture traps. But, for the uninitiated, it’s like trying to explain a migraine to someone who’s never had a headache.

It’s the incessant low-frequency noise and infrasound generated by giant industrial wind turbines that features as the most common source of complaint from those now forced to live next to wind farms: turning a quiet night in into an occasion of acoustic torture (see our post here); and destroying many a good night’s sleep (see our post here).

sleeping baby

Human beings place enormous value on silence. A while back we covered a piece from The Economist that argued that it simply makes good business sense to keep the noise down (see our post here).

As The Economist noted, humane societies have separated noisy activities since the time of the ancient Greeks – booting roosters, tinsmiths and potters out of Greek cities – and, in later times, organ grinders out of London.

In Australia today, roosters are banned in cities, suburbs and in most country towns.  They have a body clock set earlier than most people and have a routine habit of waking up the whole neighbourhood.  Faced with an errant rooster, authorities are quick to act against Foghorn Leghorn & Co on PUBLIC HEALTH GROUNDS.

foghorn

Planning laws in most States prevent panel beaters from operating in built up areas before 8am and after 6pm.

And – either by operation of EPA regulations or planning laws – there is a total ban on the operation of chainsaws and lawn mowers in cities, suburbs and most towns.  That strictly enforced prohibition operates, in Victoria, for example, Monday to Friday: before 7 am and after 8 pm; and on weekends and public holidays: before 9 am and after 8 pm.

So why then is it that hard-working rural people – who live in very quiet night-time environments – are bound to put up with this, night after merciless night?

As we’ve pointed out there’s nothing “odd” about the impact of incessant low-frequency noise on human health.  Neil Kelley was all over the relationship between turbine generated low frequency noise and sleep disturbance over 30 years ago (see our posts here and here). And noise-induced sleep disturbance has long been defined by the WHO: “as a health problem in itself (environmental insomnia), it also leads to further consequences for health and well-being” (see our post here).

So, if night-time noise isn’t a health problem, then why is it that there are strict rules about the permitted times for operating chainsaws and lawn mowers – rules that keep roosters out of towns and cities – and rules that mean the plug gets pulled on rock bands and music venues at midnight in residential areas?

But this is to comment on the noise that wind farm victims get to hear, whereas much of the acoustic energy emitted by giant turbines is not heard, but felt: which, by definition, is referred to as “infrasound”. Infrasound has been the wind industry’s “elephant” in the room – it’s made sure to bury it by drafting noise standards that ignore it; and, when hit with the evidence, lying about its impacts – but that line of “defence” is unlikely to last much longer (see our post here).

For a great little summary on wind turbine generated infrasound and its adverse affects on health, check out this video of Professor Alec Salt laying it out in clear and simple terms:

wind farm noise

Open letter….Reaching Out to the Federal Government, for Help!

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper

Prime Minister of Canada

pm@pm.gc.ca

The Honourable Peter Gordon MacKay

Minister of Justice and Attorney General

mcu@justice.gc.ca

The Honourable Rona Ambrose

Minister of Health

Health Canada

minister_ministre@hc-sc.gc.ca

Copy:

Gregory Taylor, BSc, MD, CCFP, FRCPC

Deputy Chief Public Health Officer

Public Health Agency of Canada

Gregory.Taylor@phac-aspc.gc.ca

Sarah Rudolph

Child Rights and International

Division of Children, Seniors and Healthy

Public Health Agency of Canada

sarah.rudolph@phac-aspc.gc.ca

Ms Cheryl Gallant

MP Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke

cheryl.gallant.a1@parl.gc.ca

Ms Shellie Correira

Mother of a child at risk

shelliecorreia@gmail.com

May 5, 2014

Dear Prime Minister Harper and Ministers of Justice and Health,

Re: Open Letter on the UN Rights of the Child and Industrial Wind Energy

The purpose of this letter is to request a meeting with members from the Ministries of Justice and Health including the Public Health Agency of Canada as soon as possible to discuss protection of children at risk from exposure to industrial wind energy facilities.

I have corresponded with several Ministers including those from Health Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada, Justice and Attorney General regarding my concerns associated with wind energy development and children’s risk factors and Canada’s ratification in 1991, of the treaty on the Rights of the Child.

I was advised that Canada’s domestic implementation of its obligations under the Rights of the Child Convention is multi-faceted and includes “constitutional protections under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and a variety of legislation, policies, programs and services at the federal and provincial/territorial levels.”

As well, I was informed the legislative implementation of the Convention falls under the

purview of the Department of Justice Canada. [Correspondence attached]

Attached is a submission provided to the Minister, Health Canada regarding the vulnerability of children to the effects of noise in general, and including risk factors specific to industrial wind turbines. [Health Canada_Risks to children December 27 2012 FINAL]

Another submission was made on behalf of Ms Shellie Correira. Attached is a copy of this submission plus the treating physician specialist’s opinion regarding her son’s risk from exposure to wind turbines. [Health Canada_Risks to children Correia May 15 2013]

Other submissions have been made on behalf of parents and communities which express parental concerns. These are available on request.

A review by Jan et al (2010) states:

“Animal experiments unequivocally show that sleep loss even for three or four days can adversely and permanently affect neurophysiological functions and neurogenesis.

This review summarises the increasing evidence … that chronic disturbances of sleep adversely affect brain development … Pediatric neurologists, the scientific community and the public must be aware of these recent scientific developments. Further studies are urgently required.” [Jan JE, Review article, Long-term sleep disturbances in children: A cause of neuronal loss. European Journal of Paediatric Neurology 14 (2010) 380-390]

The World Health Organization (WHO) acknowledges that noise is an “underestimated threat that can cause a number of short- and long-term health problems…” [World Health Organization Noise Facts and Figures, Sited December 23, 2012, http://www.euro.who.int/en/what-we-do/health-topics/environment-and-health/noise/facts-and-figures ]

Research indicates children’s ear damage, cognitive function and learning are affected by noise and there could be lifelong effects on academic achievement and health. Excerpts from The World Health Organization’s Training Package for the Health Sector on Children and Noise identify vulnerable groups of children at risk including the fetus and babies; preterm; children with dyslexia and hyperactivity. [World Health Organization, Children and Noise, Children’s Health and the Environment, WHO Training Package for the Health Sector, www.who.int/ceh ]

Children with pre-existing medical conditions such as autism, asthma, migraine, bronchitis, and epilepsy can be vulnerable to the effects of noise and/or stress and/or sleep disturbance. [See references below*]

There is a risk of noise-induced harm to children when industrial wind turbine facilities are sited in close proximity to family homes and schools.

I note that Canada played an instrumental role in drafting and promoting the United Nations

Convention on the Rights of the Child. As a proud Canadian, I applaud this achievement.

Ms Correira and I look forward to the opportunity to meet with representatives from the Ministries of Justice and Health including the Public Health Agency of Canada as soon as possible to discuss protection of children at risk from exposure to industrial wind energy facilities.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of Ms Shellie Correira and other concerned parents and family members,

Carmen Krogh, BScPharm

1183 Cormac Road, RR4

Killaloe, ON, K0J 2A0

Cell 613 312 9663

 

Attachments:

Open Letter on the UN Rights of the Child and Industrial Wind Energy

Correspondence attached

Health Canada_Risks to children December 27 2012 FINAL

Health Canada_Risks to children Correia May 15 2013

Letter Physician Specialist

* Citations provided:

1] Cristina Becchio, Morena Mari, Umberto Castiello, (2010). Perception of Shadows in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders PLoS ONE | May 2010 | Volume 5 | Issue 5 | e10582. Retrieved from  www.plosone.org

[2] Catherine Purple Cherry and Lauren Underwood. The ideal home for the autistic child: physiological rationale for design strategies. Autism Science Digest: The Journal Of Autismone, Issue 03 Retrieved from  www.purplecherry.com.

[3] Flavia Cortesi, Flavia Giannotti, Anna Ivanenko, Kyle Johnson (2010). Sleep in children with autistic spectrum disorder, Sleep Medicine 11 (2010) 659–664 Retrieved from www.elsevier.com/locate/sleep

[4] Hartmut Ising, Martin Ising (2002), Chronic cortisol increases in the first half of the night caused by road traffic noise. Noise and Health 2002,4:16:p13-21 Retrieved fromhttp://www.noiseandhealth.org/article.asp?issn=1463-1741;year=2002;volume=4;issue=16;spage=13;epage=21;aulast=Ising

[5] Bockelbrink A, Willich SN, Dirzus I, Reich A, Lau S, Wahn U, Keil T. (2008) Environmental noise and asthma in children: sex specific differences  J Asthma. 2008 Nov;45(9):770-3. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18972293

[6] Neut D, Fily A, Cuvellier JC, Vallée L (2011),. The prevalence of triggers in paediatric migraine: a questionnaire study in 102 children and adolescents. J Headache Pain. 2011 Nov 1. [Epub ahead of print] Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22042255

[7] Doreen Wagner, Velitchko Manahilov, Gunter Loffler, Gael E. Gordon, and Gordon N. Dutton, Visual Noise Selectively Degrades Vision in Migraine Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, April 2010, Vol. 51, No. 4 Retrieved from http://www.iovs.org/content/51/4/2294.full.pdf

[8] Ising H, Lange-Asschenfeldt H, Moriske HJ, Born J, Eilts M., Low frequency noise and stress: bronchitis and cortisol in children, Noise Health. 2004 Apr-Jun;6(23):21-8

[9] Gilboa T.Epilepsia. 2011 Dec 9. Emotional stress-induced seizures: Another reflex epilepsy? doi: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2011.03342.x. [Epub ahead of print] Retrieved fromhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22150553

[10] Epilepsy Facts – Epilepsy Canada Cited March 2012, Retrieved from   www. epilepsy@epilepsy.ca

[11] Hartmut Ising, Martin Ising (2002), Chronic cortisol increases in the first half of the night caused by road traffic noise. Noise and Health 2002,4:16:p13-21 Retrieved fromhttp://www.noiseandhealth.org/article.asp?issn=1463-1741;year=2002;volume=4;issue=16;spage=13;epage=21;aulast=Ising

[12] Neut D, Fily A, Cuvellier JC, Vallée L. The prevalence of triggers in paediatric migraine: a questionnaire study in 102 children and adolescents. J Headache Pain. 2011 Nov 1. [Epub ahead of print] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22042255

8 Attachments

Preview attachment Health Canada_Risks to children Correia May 15 2013.pdf

Health Canada_Risks to children Correia May 15 2013.pdf

Preview attachment Health Canada_Risks to children December 27 2012 FINAL.pdf

Health Canada_Risks to children December 27 2012 FINAL.pdf

Preview attachment Sprecialist Dr. Calvert’s letter.pdf

Sprecialist Dr. Calvert’s letter.pdf

Preview attachment Letter Rights of the Child May 5 2014.pdf

Letter Rights of the Child May 5 2014.pdf

Preview attachment Response Public Health Agency of Canada April 17 2014.pdf

Response Public Health Agency of Canada April 17 2014.pdf

Preview attachment Correspondance Feb 10 2014.pdf

Correspondance Feb 10 2014.pdf

Preview attachment Response Sept 22 2014 Risk to children IWT.pdf

Response Sept 22 2014 Risk to children IWT.pdf

Preview attachment Krogh_risk factors to children_industrial wind energy_Nov 5 2014.pdf

Krogh_risk factors to children_industrial wind energy_Nov 5 2014.pdf

Audiologists Explain Why Wind Turbine Noise harms the Ears…

Negative Health Effects of Noise from Industrial Wind Turbines: Some Background

This post, the first of a three-part series, provides a broad overview of the topic. The second installment will review the major research findings linking low-frequency noise and infrasound from industrial wind turbines with effects on health and quality of life. Part three will discuss the relationship between various health effects and the processing of infrasound by the ear and brain.[1]

By Jerry Punch, PhD, and Richard James, INCE, BME

wind turbine noise health

Cary Shineldecker was skeptical about the wind project the Mason County, Michigan, planning commission was considering for approval. His home, two miles from Lake Michigan, was located in an area where nighttime noise levels were around 25 dBA, with only occasional traffic and seasonal farmland noises. The rolling hills, woodlots, orchards, fields, and meadows surrounding his property contributed to its peaceful country setting. He voiced his skepticism about the wind turbinesrepeatedly in community meetings held beforeConsumers Energy was finally granted approval to construct 56 476-foot turbines, one that would be 1,139 feet from his property line, six within 3,000 feet, and 26 close enough to be visible from his property.

Cary and his wife, Karen, started to suffer symptoms of ear pressure, severe headaches, anxiety, irritability, sleep disturbance, memory loss, fatigue, and depression immediately after the turbines began operating.

Gradually, as sleep disturbance turned into sleep deprivation, they felt their home was being transformed from a sanctuary to a prison. Deciding to sell their home of 20 years, they put it on the market in March 2011, and it has remained unsold for 3-1/2 years. For the past year and a half, their nightly ritual has been taking sleeping medications and retreating into their basement to try to sleep on a corner mattress.

The Shineldeckers received few offers to buy their home, and recently accepted an offer that would mean a substantial financial loss. They are scheduled to go to trial against Consumers Energy, and if their case goes to settlement without a trial, they will likely be forced into a confidentiality agreement about their case.

MANY SUCH COMPLAINTS

Similar complaints of adverse health effects (AHEs) associated with living near utility-scale wind turbines have become commonplace in the U.S. and other developed countries. Energy companies in the U.S., motivated by lucrative tax subsidies available for developing wind resources as a form of green energy, are pushing aggressively to install more wind turbines, typically locating them near residential properties. Many rural residents now have one or more industrial machines that stand over 40 stories tall on the property alongside their home. Complaints about noise from people living within the footprint of wind energy projects are very similar to those experienced by the Shineldeckers.

Those who have never visited a wind project or who visit one only during the daytime often leave believing that the complaints of noise are unfounded, and commonly assume them to be psychologically motivated or a form of NIMBYism [2]. Those living near wind turbines say that unless one is willing to spend several nights in the area they have not experienced the noise that causes the complaints.

The Changing Rural Landscape

Green energy push in many states are making these images much more common

Prior to the installation of the wind turbines, these rural communities were typically very quiet at night, with background sound levels ranging between 20 and 25 dBA. After the turbines began operation, the noise levels jumped to 40 or even 50 dBA, and sometimes higher. It is common for wind turbines to be barely audible during the day, yet be the dominant noise source at night. Environmental sounds are quieter in the evening, lowering the background sound levels, and wind speeds tend to be higher at blade height during nighttime hours, which increases sound emissions. Further, nighttime weather conditions enhance sound propagation. The result is that at night wind turbines can be a significantly more noticeable noise source than during the daytime.

Commercial wind turbine blades produce aerodynamic noise in both the inaudible and audible range, collectively referred to as infrasound and low-frequency noise (ILFN). Although some of the audible noise is above 200 Hz, much of it falls into the low-frequency region around 0-100 Hz. Infrasound, generally considered to be inaudible, encompasses sound energy in the range from 0-20 Hz. It is measureable with either an infrasonic microphone or amicrobarometer. The frequency and amplitude of wind turbine noise depend mainly on the blade-rotation speed. Measurements show increased acoustic energy with decreasing frequency, reaching a maximum at frequencies under 1 Hz.

Promoters of wind energy frame it in agricultural terms that portray it asharvesting the wind. This framing leads to the belief that wind farms are a natural fit with agricultural land use.

do wind turbines make about as much sense as a nuclear reactor?

From this viewpoint, farmers should also be allowed to use their land to harvest the energy of the atom by hosting a small nuclear plant. Hosting a utility-scale wind turbine is not farming; it is operation of a commercial utility. The installation of utility-scale, energy-conversion machines requires strict zoning and regulation, as one would expect for a zoned industrial region. These machines are in no way similar to traditional agricultural equipment. Thus we consider the term industrial to be an accurate description of utility-scale wind turbines.

Wind turbines are often sited in regions where agricultural land use is intermixed with residential land use. A single wind energy utility typically consists of 40 to 60 wind turbines. Forty-five 2-MWatt turbines cover about 36 square miles of land. This requires only 10 to 20 farmers to sign leases for hosting one or more of the turbines, but may put several hundred non-participating farms and residential homes within the risk zone for noise disturbance.

While a few farmers or landowners in the host community benefit financially, many others—often at ratios of 20 to 1 or higher—find that the peace and quiet of evenings and nights that attracted them to the rural community is replaced with the unwanted consequences of audible sounds and inaudible infrasound.

In the final two installments of this three-part series, our goal is to explain the bases for a variety of health complaints that are being associated with the current practice of locating industrial-scale wind turbines as close as 1,200 to 1,500 feet from homes. In areas with a relatively long history of industrial wind turbines (IWTs), a distance of at least 1-1/4 miles (2 kilometers)—and more in areas with hilly terrain—is now considered necessary to avoid negative impacts on health.

jerry punch

Jerry Punch is an audiologist and professor emeritus at Michigan State University in the Department of Communicative Sciences and Disorders. Since his retirement in 2011, he has become actively involved as a private audiological consultant in areas related to his long-standing interest in community noise.

Richard James

Richard James is an acoustical consultant with over 40 years of experience in industrial noise measurement and control. He is an adjunct instructor in Michigan State University’s Department of Communicative Sciences and Disorders and an adjunct professor inCentral Michigan University’s Department of Communication Disorders.

Footnotes    (↵ returns to text)

  1. Interested readers may wish to refer to the article, “Wind-Turbine Noise: What Audiologists Should Know,” published in the July-August 2010 issue of Audiology Today, as a backdrop for this series
  2. Not In My Back Yard: NIMBY

Once Again….I have reached out to the Gov’t, to help My Son, and all Children!

November 10, 2014

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper

Prime Minister of Canada

Dear Prime Minster Harper,

I am writing to you, as supporter and friend of the

Conservative party. I am hoping that you will be able to intervene to help protect

all Canadians from intrusive health damaging  noise from industrial wind projects.

As you know, I have a personal interest in this issue. The large Niagara wind

project near my home has just received approval. It is no coincidence that its

approval was announced immediately after Health Canada Issued its flawed,

fraudulent report which claims it’s research sows that “there are no health

problems” from wind turbines

.

This Health Canada report was funded to the tune of $2.1 million from the

Canadian taxpayers, and therefore as Prime Minster, you are ultimately

responsible for it, and the consequences which flow from it’s use in Canada.

It is inevitable that many MORE Canadians will be harmed from wind turbine

noise as result of this study which has been widely criticized for adopting

methodology designed to hide and deny the health problems, rather than

properly investigate them. It is telling that

x   Health Canada ignored the advice of professionals with expertise in this

are who are independent of the wind industry

x   Health Canada used various parties who have conflicts of interest

including commercial conflicts of interest with the wind industry, and did

not disclose them

x   Health Canada issued the report without the date, making it impossible for

others with extensive experience working directly in this area, to critique it

properly

x   The report gives very appearance of being “made to order” by the wind

industry and delivered by our government, in order to be able to continue

to knowingly harm vulnerable Canadian citizens, by pretending “there is

no problem”

With respect other project just approved near my home, the closest wind turbine

would be 550M from the center of our home. The wind developer has admitted

that it would be producing noise, at the maximum allowable levels. These

decibel levels were arbitrarily established, and only with healthy brains, in mind.

There is no evidence to demonstrate that the current levels of noise pollution

from wind turbines in Ontario are safe, and there are Ministry of Environment

Field Officers who have admitted these levels are not safe. No consideration has

been given to individuals, who suffer from sensory processing issues, such as

my son, Joey.

Joey’s specialist wrote a letter for me to share, which is enclosed, explaining that

the noise from a  wind turbine in close proximity our home would be very

harmful, for my son. The cyclical, and uncontrollable nature of wind turbine noise

is especially unbearable.

I also have realized, during my struggles with the Provincial government, and

their many branches, that there has been nothing put in place to protect anyone,

regardless of what problems may arise, as result of the industrial wind projects

being forced into areas where they are not appropriate. I have met, and spoken

personally, to Premier Wynne, Minister Chiarelli, Agatha Garcia ­Wright, from the

M.O. E., and many more gov’t branches, trying to get some sort of assistance,

in finding a solution to my problems, but to no avail. Getting help Federally, is my

only option, at this point, because the only suggestion they would give me, is

“get a lawyer”. Unfortunately, I live in Ontario, and we are struggling to pay our

ever­ growing electricity bills, on top of sky­rocketing prices for the basics that

families need. Paying fora lawyer is not something many families can afford,

and the Liberal government knows that.

As you can see, I desperately need help to protect my son. The recent Health

Study was woefully incomplete, and did not even mention children, or any type of

special needs individuals. Indeed children were explicitly excluded.

Please help us find a solution to this very serious problem – for Joey, as well as

for ALL Canadians.This Health Canada Report, needs to be withdrawn, and

immediately subjected to rigorous peer review, with all of the data made public

immediately, to professionals and researchers with expertise in this area.

Reviews of all the possible conflicts of interest of all involved with this report, need

to be conducted, and made public.

A failure to take these steps, and to allow the Health Canada study to escape

proper critical scrutiny and peer review could eventually lead to charges of public

officials being complicit with torture occurring, given the widespread occurrence

of serious prolonged sleep deprivation alone, That, along with all the other health

problems residents are experiencing and health practicioners such as Joey’s

paediatrician are warning about. Such possible legal action against public

officials is being seriously considered internationally.

Sincerely,

Shellie Correia, Founder and Director,

Mothers Against wind Turbines

World Council for Nature Shares Info. On Wind Turbines!

Note: Infrasound & Low Frequency Noise is often referred to as “ILFN”

infrasound - www.bgr.bund.de
Simulation of infrasound waves propagating in the atmosphere
Source: BGR http://www.bgr.bund.de



IMPORTANT NEWS Nº 1:

Health Board: wind turbines are a hazard to human health

October 17th, 2014
GLENMORE, WISCONSIN, USA: “This week the Brown County Health Board went on record declaring that wind turbines “are a human health hazard“.


Folks living in the Glenmore area near the Shirley Wind Project have been saying this for years though, and now they have the health department on their side. By state statute wind turbines can be within 1250 feet of a home. The Brown County Board of Health says that’s too close for comfort.”

Read more: windfarm a health hazard  — don’t miss the video


The wording of the motion was as follows:


To Declare The Industrial Wind Turbines In The Town Of Glenmore, Brown County. WI. A Human Health Hazard For All People (Residents, Workers, Visitors, And Sensitive Passersby) Who Are Exposed To Infrasound/Low Frequency Noise And Other Emissions Potentially Harmful To Human Health.”

Read more: ILFN potentially harmful

wind turbine effects on the inner ear



IMPORTANT NEWS Nº 2


Windfarm victims worldwide will feel vincicated by this:


In Plympton Wyoming, Ontario, Canada, complaints from windfarm victims “will lead to investigations and hefty fines. This is the first bylaw directly referencing ILFN and demanding fines of between $500 to $10,000 per day, and which may be, the bylaw states, in excess of $100,000.


The bylaw references charging fees to developers if ILFN causes residents problems. Common effects are, from chronic unrelenting noise: sleep disorders, hormone level disruption, increased risk of disease, diabetes, hypertension, depression, heart arrhythmias, and possibly even cancer.”


Read more: a groundbreaking Wind Turbine Noise bylaw


BACK IN 2013, STEPHEN AMBROSE, Board Certified Member of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering and a Full Member of the Acoustical Society of America, testified in front of the Vermont Senate Natural Resources Committee:


Regulatory boards are now unable to protect public health and wellbeing because the wind turbine industry has substituted their own measurement and assessment procedures through international committees.


The wind turbine acoustic standards differ dramatically from other noise sources. Wind turbines are evaluated using A- weighted sound levels by removing all low frequency and infrasound from consideration. A-weighting lowers infrasound levels by 50 dB at 20 Hz and 70 dB at 10 Hz. This promotes false statements that wind turbines do not produce infrasound.


“I have measured infrasound using a sound level meter and a microbarograph. I have experienced the adverse health effects caused by infrasound. Again, I felt miserable with a headache, nausea, loss of cognitive ability, sleep interference and interruption.


“I felt better when only a few miles away from the wind turbines’ influence.”


“I recommend that anyone who thinks wind turbines are good acoustic neighbors to do what I did. Go to a wind turbine site, live as a neighbor, and sleep in their bed when the wind blows strong.


Read more: Testimony from an acoustician with 35 years’ experience




THE BIBLE of WINDFARM EFFECTS on NEIGHBOURS:


This is just the concluding paragraph, but there is plenty more:


A compliant project may still cause damage to neighbours for numerous reasons:


– first, the standard only refers to dBA and thereby omits reference to ILFN;


– secondly, even with regard to audible noise, the standard refers to a maximum of 40 dBA outdoors, whereas every other form of industrial or other noise in country and city is limited to 35 dBA maximum. There is no technical basis for such an aberration, and it is clearly, (intended or not), discriminatory;


– thirdly, in quiet rural environments, even 35 dBA will be intrusive and loud, if the background level is below 25dBA, which is not uncommon.


The ear responds to the peaks of sound levels, not the averages. The wind turbine noise standards all refer only to averages, and exclude ILFN, and do not account for the human response, so cannot protect people from predictable serious harm to their health.”


The definitive document on wind turbine noise

Wind Turbines….The Facts Blow Them Out of the Water…..Useless Machines!

Wind Turbine Campaign

People often ask me to explain ’ What have I got against wind turbines?’

Here are a few of their problems:

    1 They exacerbate flooding due to the massive concrete bases being built on our hills for turbines which cause faster run-off during periods of heavy rain. Old wind farms, such as at Llandinam, have passed their sell-by date much earlier than expected and are being replaced by larger turbines, each of which requires a new concrete base. They old bases are left in the ground. As you will appreciate, the mountain will eventually be covered in concrete, a highly-polluting process itself, and this will increase flooding many-fold.

    2 Proximity to wind turbines can cause high blood pressure, tinitus, sleeplessness and many other health problems, due to infra-sound – there is now much evidence of this in many countries, with massed chronic examples in the US, Canada and Australia. (many reports, including Wind Turbines Make Waves: Why Some Residents Near Wind Turbines Become Ill, contained in the Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30th September 2011; Wind Turbine Syndrome, A Report on a Natural Experiment, by Dr Nina Pierpont, published 2009 by K-Selected Books, Santa Fe). The UK government insists on using a system called ETSU-97 for monitoring wind noise, but this is 16 years old, produced when turbines were far smaller, and there is much more sensitive equipment available now, which they refuse to use because it will reveal the shortcomings of the industry. Unbelievably, the Health & Safety Executive are kept well away from wind turbine developments, when every other form of activity in the UK is subject to their investigations, even harmless bookshops in Brecon.

    3 Despite what government and the wind industry say, turbines devalue property and in many cases destroy any chance of selling the property – there is a lot of evidence from estate agents all over the UK.

    4 In extreme cases people such as Jane and Julian Davis in Lincolnshire even had to abandon their property. There is no provision for compensation for such people.

    5 Wind energy destroys local jobs: according to a report commissioned by the Scottish government 3.7 jobs in the UK are lost for every 1 wind one produced (Verso Economics: The Economic Impact of Renewable Energy Policy in Scotland and the UK 2011).

    6 The Mid-Wales economy relies heavily on tourism, and many businesses will have to close and the economy devastated if hundreds more turbines are erected. It is completely unfair that Powys should bear such massive numbers of these alien, out-of-scale objects and have to pay some £3m to fight it through the public inquiries – that is why we have the highest hike in council tax in the country. See the PCC Red Kite newsletter.

    7 Industrialising much of our finest natural landscapes that are vital for people’s wellbeing, tourism, etc, is totally unacceptable in a civilised society. We need natural landscapes unadulterated by monstrous metal structures, for our well-being.

    8 Introducing gridlock into Mid-Wales highways over 7 years or more as is forecast by Powys CC (comment by Dale Boyington, Director of Highways, PCC in 2012) if current proposals go ahead will inevitably destroy much of the fabric of our society and culture, but this matters not a jot to those in Cardiff or Westminster.

    9 This is leading to the disintegration of local communities, many of whom will be virtually imprisoned when surrounded by monstrous metal turbines nearly 500 feet high.

   10 Billions of our money going abroad to foreign energy corporations (who form some 70% of our energy companies), furthering problems with our balance of payments.

    11 Energy bills are rising alarmingly, mainly because of subsidies to wind energy, thus creating fuel poverty for so many in Mid-Wales, with consequent increase in deaths in winter.

    12 Turbines kill birds (particular raptors) and bats, also spook many domestic animals. Horses are especially vulnerable.

    13 Turbine bases destroy vast areas of peat blanket, the British equivalent of a rain forest and thus releasing vast tonnes of CO2.

    14 The intermittency of wind energy makes it a pretty useless source of energy, leading to brown-outs, grid destabilisation and costly backup from traditional power stations which are forced to operate at inefficient levels, and thus creating more CO2 than if they operated normally without the turbines.

    15 People regard nuclear power as being dangerous, yet more people have died from wind turbine accidents over the last five years than from nuclear ones. During the 5 years up to December 2011 there were 1,500 accidents and incidents on UK wind farms, with four deaths, according to Renewable UK.

    16 During periods when the grid cannot cope with input from wind turbines the latter are told to shut down, yet are given hundreds of thousands of pounds for not producing any power.

    17 Wind turbines each have a magnet as part of their structure, and some of the content for this comes from rare earth minerals mined exclusively in China. This process is dirty and dangerous, with waste products, including radioactive thorium apparently allowed to leech into the waterways. See  http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/july-dec09/china_12-14.html

This book explains much of the above in greater detail:
  The Wind Farm Scam by Dr John Etherington, £9.99 Stacey International publishers

 David Bellamy

Watch this excellent film by Godfrey Bloom explaining the economics and the threats to our energy supply that will result from our government’s obsession with wind energy

mynyydygwairsmall.jpg

Mynydd y Gwair, Watercolour by David Bellamy

There is a proposal to built a large Wind Turbine development on this beautiful unspoilt common land, with views across Swansea Bay, the Bristol Channel and the Decon coastline. The local people will loose their peace and serenity, and walkers will loose the sense of isolation and solitude so vital to restore well-being in many of us. And all for the sake of a small supply of intermittent electricity

We are both very concerned about the impact of proposed Wind Turbine developments in the Welsh Uplands. Numerous developments of large Wind Turbines are currently being proposed for many of the country’s most beautiful hilltops. Sixteen wind turbine developments already exist in Wales creating an unacceptable visual intrustion. Some turbine developments are currently being built such as Cefn Croes in Ceredigion where huge tracts of land are being devastated in order to install access roads. Visit Cefn Croeswebsite to see the damage. All this destruction in order to produce a very small and intermittent supply of electricity.

‘We are both working to bring about more awareness of the issues’

twodbssmall.jpg

The two David Bellamys have met on two protest marches against wind turbine developments in Wales.

David and Jenny passionately believe in the principle of renewable energy but wind turbines are the least reliable or productive, and the most intrusive of all the renewable options.

Far from being a ‘green’ option, there are many arguments against them. For example – here are just two of the many facts

1. Their unreliability means that conventional coal, gas or oil fired power stations will still have to be kept running on standby in case the wind stops blowing, or blows too fast, thus any perceived saving of carbon emissions is a myth.

2. 1,000 tons of concrete is required to install each individual turbine. Concrete production is the second most polluting industrial process in the world.

Please take the time to educate yourself on this subject as we are being told by our government that this is the solution to reducing our carbon emissions but wind tubines cannot help to solve the problem of global warming in fact they may even be adding to it.

The only people to benefit from this industrialisation of our countryside will be the developers.

Wind Company Admits That Barb Ashbee’s Home, was Uninhabitable….

Barb Ashbee: wind company “agreed that we couldn’t live there any more”

barbara-ashbees-homeI’m sure everyone reading this has had the experience of phoning some corporate entity (Hydro, Bell, Visa, etc.) and heard the pre-recorded message, “This call is being recorded for quality assurances purposes…”. Yeah right. Well, a similar act is played out in the ERT hearings. Often the wind company will engage a court reporter to provide a transcript of the testimony. Other parties will be offered copies IF they pony up a portion of the costs. Often the MOE will do so. They will use this record further down the line when final submissions are made. What they likely will not do is get the transcript certified. Why, you ask? Because certified transcripts must be submitted to the ERT and then it becomes a public document that anyone can a have access to.

There’s lots of stuff that happens in an ERT that a wind company and their helpers (MOE) wouldn’t want the public to hear. I wish we could have afforded the cost of a court reporter for Nextera’s Adelaide ERT appeal. That’s the way the game is played.

So when an actual certified transcript becomes available, it’s a rare thing indeed. Such is the case with the St.Columban and K-2 appeals and excerpts appeared in the factum submitted for the court case in London in mid-November. Of particular note is the testimony of the post-turbine witnesses for those appeals.  The first installment is Barb Ashbee’s testimony for both appeals.

Read on:

Evidence of post-turbine witnesses heard on all three appeals 

The Dixon-Ryan Appellants called the evidence of two post-turbine witnesses, Barb Ashbee and Sandy MacLeod, both of whom were forced to leave their home because of the effects that the wind turbines were having on their health. Their evidence was subsequently entered before the Tribunal by way of transcript on the Drennan and Kroeplin appeals.

In 2005, Barb Ashbee and her husband moved into a home located in Shelbourne, Ontario. The home was intended to be their retirement property. Shelbourne is home to one of the first wind power projects in Ontario, the Melancthon EcoPower Project. The project consists of two phases and is comprised of approximately 123 wind turbines.

When Ms. Ashbee first learned of the project she was excited about the prospect of wind energy. She recalled telling her family and friends about how exciting it was that they were getting turbines, and would go out in her backyard and take pictures.

Ms. Ashbee’s home was affected by phase two of the project which began commercial operation in 2008. Ms. Ashbee’s home was located 457 meters from the closest turbine. She had four more turbines located within one kilometer, and another 15 turbines within two kilometers.

She began keeping a journal to describe what the noise sounded like and any symptoms she and her husband were experiencing.

Ms. Ashbee experienced sleep deprivation, stomach aches, heart palpitations, headaches, and dizziness. In addition, she began having nosebleeds and experiencing terrible cognitive and memory problems as time wore on.

Ms. Ashbee never sought medical attention specifically for the symptoms she was experiencing but did explain to her doctors what was going on with the wind turbines. Ms. Ashbee recounted that she informed her doctors about the wind turbines “because when I had the appointment with them I was severely sleep deprived and impacted and I wasn’t my normal self and I did want to tell them about what was going on.”

Ms. Ashbee immediately reported her symptoms to the project owner and they began conducting testing. Soon thereafter the MOE became involved in the process of monitoring the turbines and of receiving complaints. After the MOE and the project owner began testing on the project, they indicated to Ms. Ashbee that the project was in compliance with the guidelines and the 40dBA level permitted by the regulatory guidelines.

To try and mitigate the effects that the Ashbees were experiencing in their home, the wind company shut down the five turbines closest to their home. Despite this, the Ashbees reported still feeling a vibration and humming in the house, and they continued to be deprived of sleep and to experience headaches.24

The Ashbees tried to adjust to the turbine noise with ear plugs, but found no relief with these because the vibration was being felt throughout the house. They moved their bed out into the detached garage to see if it would help but this did not give much relief.25

During the period from May 8, 2009 to June 25th, 2009, at which time they left their home for good, the Ashbees moved into a tent in their backyard with their animals to gain respite from the vibration they were experiencing within their home.

Q. Okay. And so during the entire period did you remain in your house?

A. Yeah.

Q. And so you slept the entire time in your bedroom?

A. No, we got to the point we started looking for a rental and because our, like, we were all affected and we started, first I started looking for a rental, but we had three dogs, two cats to move and there’s not very many people that will rent with that many pets. And plus we were paying the mortgage and would have to pay out money for rent again and it was horrible.

And we thought well, we’ll rent a trailer, like, park it on the driveway; four wheel trailer thing. And I phoned around to a few places and there was nothing. I couldn’t find anything, nobody rented them.

We moved the bed out into the detached garage hoping it would be quieter out there so we wouldn’t have the vibration and noise and it was actually out there too. So it really didn’t help anything.

The wind company offered us a house a concession over from us and we did attempt to move into it. There were problems with it, with mould in it, so we couldn’t move in. So we were stuck, again.

So we ended up moving into a tent in the backyard because the turbines were being shut down at night and the vibration wasn’t there like it was in the house. You would feel it a little bit, a little bit of it but it wasn’t resonating like it was in the house. So we bought a tent. We went through two, actually, put the tent in the backyard, put our bed out there, a little table and a heater and a light and all the animals slept out there with us and that’s how we coped.

Q. And how long did you have to do that for?

A. May until we left.

Q. And when did you leave?

A. June 25th. I think it was May, early May. It’ll be in here, actually I guess. Do you want the date?

Q. If you have it.

A. May 7 we bought the tent.

Q. Okay. So then would May 8 be your first night in the tent?

A. Yeah, that was yeah, we set it up and put the bed in.

Q. And, sorry, you said you left June 25th?

A. Twenty fifth.

Q. So for almost two months did you sleep in the tent constantly every night?

A. Pretty much. The odd night when it didn’t seem too bad we would try it in the house. We put the spare bed in the tent and we still had the bed in there but there weren’t very many nights we were able to stay in the house.

Q. So did you have some alleviation from your symptoms while you slept in the tent?

A. Oh, yeah, we could sleep again, yeah. It still wasn’t the best because we were in a tent and it was still pretty cold still, but it was better than the house.26

Once Ms. Ashbee and her husband moved from their home, they no longer experienced any of the adverse health effects they had while living in the home.

Q. And so the symptoms that you described for us earlier, do you still suffer from any of those symptoms?

A. No.

Q. Okay. And when did those symptoms stop altogether?

A. Within pretty much within weeks, a month after we moved. Like, the sleep deprivation stopped immediately. The headaches stopped and that. I mean, the other effects, the upset and anger and that lasted a little bit longer, but as far as the stomach aches, the chest pressure, that was pretty much gone.

Q. Okay. And just so that we make sure it’s on the record, can you tell us how long you were in the environment when you were exposed to the wind turbines and these adverse health effects?

A. From early December 2008 to June 25th, 2009.

During cross examination, Ms. Ashbee was vigorously questioned about the source of the noise and vibration that she experienced in her home. The questioning was directed at demonstrating that her concerns arose not from the audible noise, but rather from some low frequency sound. This low frequency sound and its impacts is the same issue that Health Canada is now investigating through their study.

Q. And how long after they became operational did you notice that you were having problems?

A. Pretty much right away, like, within the first week, two weeks.

Q. And you talked about and I know from reading through your journal that the vibration was particularly a problem for you, correct?

A. Yeah, mm hmm.

Q. Would you say that that was the bigger problem than the noise?

A. It was as big a problem. The noise was a big problem. When they started shutting them down, it alleviated that, but the vibration was just as bad. Like, it didn’t fix that part of it.

Q. And you would know that because when five of the closest turbines were down around you, you were still bothered significantly by the noise?

A. The vibration.

Q. Or by the vibration, yes.

A. Yeah.

Q. Including the fact that you were in a tent and it was better in the tent than in your home, right?

A. Yes, it was.

Q. Okay. And you think that’s because of the and I don’t mean to demean you by saying you think your belief is that that’s because there was vibrations at that time with the turbines down was the problem?

A. Well, it was in the house. Whether it was coming from the turbines or the electrical, I don’t know.

Q. Okay. So you still have never been given an answer on that?

A. No. Excuse me, there was a 160 spike measured by the wind developer, low frequency spike and so that was determined that it was in our house. It was measured. And Gary Tomlinson told me that that 160 hertz was coming off all the turbines, not just the one behind us.

Q. So when you say a spike, was that a one time thing?

A. No, it’s acoustical terminology. And I don’t know acoustics.

Q. You’re as blind as me on that.

A. They showed us the graph and it’s a spike. It’s continuous, but it shows the spike and they were outside measuring and inside measuring and a spike happened and they went oh, there’s a 160 spike and then the wind developer told us there’s definitely a problem with the low frequency in our house. So I don’t understand the rest.

Q. That was going to be my next question that you have said the wind turbine company acknowledged to you that there was a problem in your home because of the turbine, some aspect of the operation of the turbines?

A. Yeah.

Q. And to your knowledge, was that the reason for the buy out of your home?

A. They agreed that we couldn’t live there any more, yeah.

Although Ms. Ashbee and her husband suffered these adverse health effects, they did not seek medical attention. Ms. Ashbee chose not to seek medical attention because her doctors “were not very engaging with wind turbine problems” at the time she was experiencing her symptoms. Additionally, Ms. Ashbee felt that she knew that the wind turbines were what was causing her health problems.

Q. And it’s fair to say that they weren’t concerning you enough that you went to a doctor to have them checked out?

A. I knew what was causing them so.

Q. Okay, but even if you know the cause of something, it didn’t concern you enough to go to a doctor to have them check out whether or not they should be doing something, putting you on heart medication?

A. I talked to this doctor and I talked to my doctor in Toronto, and they weren’t very engaging with wind turbine problems. So I mean, I — what do you want me to do? I know what’s causing them. If they stopped them, we knew because, I mean, we were both going through the same thing, sometimes at different times it would come on.

Ms. Ashbee’s evidence is consistent with the evidence of other post-turbine witnesses that when they left the vicinity of the wind project, they no longer experienced the adverse health effects. Another witness that provided similar evidence before the Tribunal was Ms. Sandy MacLeod. Ms. MacLeod is a high school teacher and lived in Ripley, Ontario, the home of the Ripley Wind Project.

Health Dept. working on a Way to Force Wind Industry to Address Health Concerns…

Health officials weigh next step in wind turbine battle

73 43LINKEDIN 4COMMENTMORE

Brown County health officials have declared wind turbines a public health risk, but they haven’t determined how to put their declaration into action.

The county’s Health Board this month declared the Shirley Wind Farm operated by Duke Energy Renewables poses a health risk to its neighbors in the town of Glenmore. Three families have moved out of their homes rather than endure physical illness they blame on the low-frequency noise the wind turbines generate, according to Audrey Murphy, president of the board that oversees the Brown County Health Department.

“We struggled with this but just felt we needed to take some action to help these citizens,” Murphy said.

Murphy called the declaration a first step, but “the second step is up to the director of our Health Department, Judy Friederichs, and corporation counsel.”

The Health Department has statutory authority for licensing, inspection and enforcement for businesses where health and environmental problems are at issue, but just what that means for the wind farm has not yet been determined, Friederichs said.

State health officials have expressed interest in participating in Brown County’s discussion of the issue, Friederichs said. She, board members and the county’s lawyer need to put their heads together to determine the next step, she said. No timeline has been established.

“We’re all saying the same thing here: Now what?” Friederichs said. “There aren’t a lot of alternatives to mitigation. It really depends now on where this goes, what type of referrals we get, etc. There’s ongoing concerns. We’re going to have to really look at it, and it’s more of a legal question.”

Whatever happens, residents “are grateful to the Board of Health for reviewing the research and listening to the people of Brown County,” said Susan Ashley, who also lives in the Shirley area and who has helped rally opposition to the wind farm through the years.

Twenty families in the town have documented health issues since the wind farm started operated in 2009, Ashley said.

Duke Energy Renewables was not invited to the health board’s discussion and would have cited tests that determined sound levels from the wind generators were low and could not be linked to adverse health impacts, company spokeswoman Tammie McGee said. The company has not received any formal word about the board’s declaration, McGee said.

Dr. Jay Tibbetts, vice president of the Brown County health board and its medical adviser, said he knows of no science that proves there isn’t a link between health problems and the low-frequency noise the giant fans produce.

“There’s been nothing that’s debunked anything,” he said. “As far as what’s happening to these people, it doesn’t make a difference whether you’re in Shirley or Denmark, or Ontario, Canada. Forty people have moved out of their homes, and it’s not just for jollies. In Shirley, three people have moved out of their homes. I know all three. They’re not nuts. They’re severely suffering.”

People might not be able to hear the sounds the Shirley turbines produce, but Tibbetts said he knows of a teenager living in the area who can tell when the turbines are off or on without being able to see them. Area residents or former residents report headaches, nausea and other symptoms they say are brought on by the turbines, and those symptoms clear up when the residents move elsewhere for a time, Tibbetts said.

The board’s declaration may be cutting edge and controversial, but it wasn’t made lightly or without the weight of science behind it, Murphy said

“This is a serious step,” she said. “We didn’t make it lightly. There is science from around the world — the World Health Organization, Denmark, Poland, Germany. We believe there’s enough science.”

Darrell Ashley, who is Susan Ashley’s father-in-law and lives within a mile of the Shirley turbines, said his wife moved out of the house for several months until her symptoms disappeared. She has since moved back, and her symptoms are coming back, he said.

“I’m getting worse and I can’t afford to move out,” he said. “I’m just getting weaker — my legs, back, feet. My concentration is gone, head pressure, ear aches, headaches, it just goes on and on.”

Prior to 2009, when the turbines weren’t operating, he and his wife had no such problems, he said. He praised the health board and said he appreciated that someone finally listened to residents’ complaints.

Murphy said Brown County is probably the first governmental body in Wisconsin and perhaps the first in the country to make the formal declaration.

The board has been wrestling with the issue for about the last four years, Murphy said. While some scientific studies have failed to find a link between health risks and the low-frequency noise that wind turbines generate, two studies done recently on the Shirley Wind Farm specifically say otherwise, Murphy said.

“While there may still be debate about the precise mechanism that causes these sounds to induce the symptoms, it is clear from (these studies) … that acoustic energy emitted by operation of modern wind turbines is at the root of adverse health effects,” Murphy said.