There is some information from the UK and WHO that does show for conventional noise pollution (freeways and airports) that:
(1) chronic loss of sleep will seriously affect health and over long exposure is known to cause myocardial infarction.
(2) In combination with other effects, like annoying flicker or perhaps low-frequency sounds (which are very strong over a mile from the turbine) the health effects are more severe.
The US EPA has a nice and comprehensive study completed in 1971 that discusses modern noise pollution, not exhibited really strong till the advent of extensive freeways and jet airports after WW II. They point out that there is a vast difference between urban noise and rural noise, with all urban noise "man made", and highly irritating if not managed. So far every wind farm is trying to, or has sited their turbines with noise levels approaching urban areas with airports in the vicinithy, 50 dBA. This is completely absurd and brings tremendous noise pollution to the rural settings where these farms are placed.
So the story of Mr. Marshall in Ontario, with 5 large turbines within 1/4 mile, is not to be considered unusual and will be frequently repeated as windfams proliferate. At the Fenner farm I noticed all the turbines were synchronous - ie the blades pointed at the same angle and rotated at the same rate. The sounds therefore will add harmoniously and become stronger at "nearby" residences. "Nearby" does not mean close to the wind turbines since sounds refract, it means residences 1/4 mile away or so where the refraction and additive effects are worse. All this should have been accounted for in the wind farm noise analysis. If it was not, which it most likely wasn't, then I would think Mr. Marshall should have good cause to sue.
No comments:
Post a Comment