CAPE VINCENT — The town's Zoning Board of Appeals is standing by its decision that Roger D. Alexander's 92-foot-tall personal wind turbine is illegal.
At a ZBA meeting Monday, Chairman Edward P. Bender said Mr. Alexander does not have to take his wind turbine down immediately. It's up to the Town Council to make that decision, he said.
If the town board upholds the ZBA's decision at its Oct. 8 meeting, the town's zoning enforcement officer will notify Mr. Alexander of his violation by mail, giving him 14 days to take down the turbine.
After a public hearing on the issue, The ZBA voted unanimously to treat residential wind turbines as an accessory structure. Section 585 of the zoning law, which deals with such structures on individual lots, limits their height to 35 feet.
The turbine was constructed after permits were issued by the town's zoning enforcement officer, Alan N. Wood, in May. The permit was renewed in July. Mr. Alexander, owner of the Lazy Acres Mobile Home Park, said he erected a personal wind turbine next to his residence on County Route 7 to reduce his utility bill.
"The permit was improperly issued," Mr. Bender said Monday.
After the tower went up, a neighbor, Mary C. Grogan, filed a complaint with the ZBA.
"When I come up here next spring, I don't want to see it there," Mrs. Grogan said.
Albert J. Gibbs, who also lives next to Mr. Alexander, said Monday that he was upset Mr. Alexander never notified his neighbors about the turbine. Mr. Gibbs said he has Meniere's disease and argued the noise from the turbine would cause him to lose balance. Meniere's disease is an inner-ear disorder that causes dizziness, tinnitus and hearing loss.
David B. Guertsen, Mr. Alexander's attorney, said Mr. Alexander's neighbors had plenty of time to complain before the turbine was erected as his client completed the foundation for the tower last September. Mr. Guertsen said his client spent $80,000 to erect the turbine and the ZBA should uphold Mr. Wood's decision to issue the permit.
Mr. Wood said he issued the permits because he was told, by both the zoning and planning boards, there were no setback and height rules for residential wind turbines in the zoning ordinance.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Man dies in Highland wind farm accident
A man has died following an industrial accident at a wind farm near Thurso.
The man was carrying out maintenance on one of the turbines at Cassey Myre wind farm, just south of Spittal.
Emergency services were called to the scene at around 9.15am on Wednesday.
Police are continuing inquiries into the circumstances of the death and a report will be submitted to the Procurator Fiscal.
The Health and Safety Executive have been made aware of the incident.
The man was carrying out maintenance on one of the turbines at Cassey Myre wind farm, just south of Spittal.
Emergency services were called to the scene at around 9.15am on Wednesday.
Police are continuing inquiries into the circumstances of the death and a report will be submitted to the Procurator Fiscal.
The Health and Safety Executive have been made aware of the incident.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Wind-farm lease buyouts coming to New York
CHATEAUGAY — Wind-farm-lease holders may soon be able to opt for lump-sum payments for their anticipated lease agreements instead of waiting for periodic checks.
Chuck Hinckley, the former chief operating officer of Noble Environmental Power, is now CEO of American Wind Capital Co. in Essex, Conn., which just announced that it has had an infusion of cash from investment bankers and a private energy-technology investor.
The cash will continue to be used in California, Texas and other states with wind-energy projects that have longer operational track records.
Hinckley said the company does not operate in New York yet and "will focus on non-Noble projects."
But within six to eight months, eligible lease holders at Maple Ridge Wind Farm in Lewis County may be able to get payments now in exchange for lease rights.
"It's the value of the dollar now compared to the value over time," Hinckley said. "Our interest is long-term ownership of royalty payments that we retain.
"The advantage to property owners is cash now," he said, rather than in smaller amounts over the life of the lease agreements.
Hinckley said he left Noble Environmental during the downturn in the global economy a year ago partly because he wanted to be more active in recovery than the company wanted to be.
He joined Thomas H. Lee Partners, then started the royalty-acquisition company American Wind in 2008.
He said the company isn't looking at Noble sites yet because there is not a long enough history of the operations at any of the operational wind-farm projects.
Noble owns the Altona Wind farm, which produces 97.5 megawatts of power, and Chateaugay Wind Park, which produces 106.5 megawatts.
The cash-for-lump-sum buyouts came from a division of Barclays Bank PLC and NGP Energy Technology Partners.
Hinckley declined to say how much money was put up, but Barclays typically issues a line of equity between $50 million and $100 million, according to a news release from American Wind.
Chuck Hinckley, the former chief operating officer of Noble Environmental Power, is now CEO of American Wind Capital Co. in Essex, Conn., which just announced that it has had an infusion of cash from investment bankers and a private energy-technology investor.
The cash will continue to be used in California, Texas and other states with wind-energy projects that have longer operational track records.
Hinckley said the company does not operate in New York yet and "will focus on non-Noble projects."
But within six to eight months, eligible lease holders at Maple Ridge Wind Farm in Lewis County may be able to get payments now in exchange for lease rights.
"It's the value of the dollar now compared to the value over time," Hinckley said. "Our interest is long-term ownership of royalty payments that we retain.
"The advantage to property owners is cash now," he said, rather than in smaller amounts over the life of the lease agreements.
Hinckley said he left Noble Environmental during the downturn in the global economy a year ago partly because he wanted to be more active in recovery than the company wanted to be.
He joined Thomas H. Lee Partners, then started the royalty-acquisition company American Wind in 2008.
He said the company isn't looking at Noble sites yet because there is not a long enough history of the operations at any of the operational wind-farm projects.
Noble owns the Altona Wind farm, which produces 97.5 megawatts of power, and Chateaugay Wind Park, which produces 106.5 megawatts.
The cash-for-lump-sum buyouts came from a division of Barclays Bank PLC and NGP Energy Technology Partners.
Hinckley declined to say how much money was put up, but Barclays typically issues a line of equity between $50 million and $100 million, according to a news release from American Wind.
GE enters growing offshore wind market
SCHENECTADY -- General Electric Co. grabbed a major foothold into Europe's growing offshore wind market Monday by completing the acquisition of a Norwegian wind turbine company.
The $18 million deal for ScanWind was originally announced last month. But Victor Abate, the head of GE Energy's Schenectady-based renewable energy unit, announced at an industry conference in Sweden today that the deal had been completed.
"The acquisition of ScanWind is an important step in our strategy to place GE in a strong position in the growing offshore wind segment," Abate said at the European Offshore Wind Conference in Stockholm.
ScanWind employs 41 people and has operations in both Trondheim, Norway and Karlstad, Sweden. The company designed and developed 11 wind turbines operating off the coast of Norway.
The acquisition significantly adds to GE's wind turbine portfolio that includes 1.5 megawatt and 2.5 megawatt turbines used on land. Offshore wind farms in the ocean require larger turbines, and ScanWind has been developing 3.5 megawatt turbines that GE will now have the expertise to design and sell. GE has previously been involved in a pilot offshore project off the coast of Ireland, and researchers at the GE Global Research Center in Niskayuna have been trying to develop wind turbines that could be as large as five or seven megawatts.
The offshore wind market is also exploding in Europe. GE says that the offshore wind market is expected to grow from an installed based of 1.5 gigawatts to 30 gigawatts by 2020, a 20-fold increase.
The Financial Times said in a story in Monday's edition that GE was planning to set up offshore wind turbine manufacturing facilities in Europe to serve this growing market, "potentially creating thousands of new" design and manufacturing jobs.
The question is how much that surge into Europe will impact Schenectady, where GE's wind operations are headquartered. Hundreds of turbine design and service employees are located in Schenectady, although manufacturing is done elsewhere.
GE Energy spokeswoman Milissa Rocker said the initial job growth will likely be abroad where ScanWind's operations are located. "This is a long-term thing," Rocker said. "There will be jobs. But initially they'll be in Europe."
Larry Rulison can be reached at 454-5504 or by e-mail at lrulison@timesunion.com.
The $18 million deal for ScanWind was originally announced last month. But Victor Abate, the head of GE Energy's Schenectady-based renewable energy unit, announced at an industry conference in Sweden today that the deal had been completed.
"The acquisition of ScanWind is an important step in our strategy to place GE in a strong position in the growing offshore wind segment," Abate said at the European Offshore Wind Conference in Stockholm.
ScanWind employs 41 people and has operations in both Trondheim, Norway and Karlstad, Sweden. The company designed and developed 11 wind turbines operating off the coast of Norway.
The acquisition significantly adds to GE's wind turbine portfolio that includes 1.5 megawatt and 2.5 megawatt turbines used on land. Offshore wind farms in the ocean require larger turbines, and ScanWind has been developing 3.5 megawatt turbines that GE will now have the expertise to design and sell. GE has previously been involved in a pilot offshore project off the coast of Ireland, and researchers at the GE Global Research Center in Niskayuna have been trying to develop wind turbines that could be as large as five or seven megawatts.
The offshore wind market is also exploding in Europe. GE says that the offshore wind market is expected to grow from an installed based of 1.5 gigawatts to 30 gigawatts by 2020, a 20-fold increase.
The Financial Times said in a story in Monday's edition that GE was planning to set up offshore wind turbine manufacturing facilities in Europe to serve this growing market, "potentially creating thousands of new" design and manufacturing jobs.
The question is how much that surge into Europe will impact Schenectady, where GE's wind operations are headquartered. Hundreds of turbine design and service employees are located in Schenectady, although manufacturing is done elsewhere.
GE Energy spokeswoman Milissa Rocker said the initial job growth will likely be abroad where ScanWind's operations are located. "This is a long-term thing," Rocker said. "There will be jobs. But initially they'll be in Europe."
Larry Rulison can be reached at 454-5504 or by e-mail at lrulison@timesunion.com.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Maple Ridge tax loss a warning for Cape
I am a year-round resident of Cape Vincent and have attended meetings, researched windmills and their placement and health issues. There are so many issues that can and will affect our community and any other community with windmills on their agenda.
I recently read about Lewis County's loss of income from the Maple Ridge Wind Farm because of the loss of their Empire Zone certification. This is something of great importance to any community that is considering wind farms. When monies come into a community, budgets are set up and the spending begins. Projects are started, and the community depends on the yearly income from the wind farms to meet the demand of new expenses and projects.
Now Lewis County has to make up a loss of income,and that can be made up one way, and one way only, taxpayers. Businesses and homes will have to share the burden of the loss.There is no one else to turn to. Can this happen in other towns with wind farms? You bet it can.
We as a community, with our leaders, need to stand back and take a hard look at the fate of Lewis County. We need to protect the future of our community. We need to protect our investments. We need to do what is right for the entire community of Cape Vincent, not the wind farm companies or their investors, but the people throughout our area who will have to live with health issues, noise, declining property values and the horrible sight of these 450-foot spinning windmills throughout the community.
Add to it the loss of promised and expected income like Lewis County and that spells disaster.
Mariana Reinhart
Cape Vincent
I recently read about Lewis County's loss of income from the Maple Ridge Wind Farm because of the loss of their Empire Zone certification. This is something of great importance to any community that is considering wind farms. When monies come into a community, budgets are set up and the spending begins. Projects are started, and the community depends on the yearly income from the wind farms to meet the demand of new expenses and projects.
Now Lewis County has to make up a loss of income,and that can be made up one way, and one way only, taxpayers. Businesses and homes will have to share the burden of the loss.There is no one else to turn to. Can this happen in other towns with wind farms? You bet it can.
We as a community, with our leaders, need to stand back and take a hard look at the fate of Lewis County. We need to protect the future of our community. We need to protect our investments. We need to do what is right for the entire community of Cape Vincent, not the wind farm companies or their investors, but the people throughout our area who will have to live with health issues, noise, declining property values and the horrible sight of these 450-foot spinning windmills throughout the community.
Add to it the loss of promised and expected income like Lewis County and that spells disaster.
Mariana Reinhart
Cape Vincent
Critics say wind turbines hurt land values
Land values have fallen on properties near wind turbines built as part of the largest wind power projects in the state, a study funded by wind-power critics says.
The study found property values have fallen by at least 19% for sales of land near the We Energies wind farm in Fond du Lac County, and at least 12% for sales of land near Invenergy LLC's Forward Wind project in Fond du Lac and Dodge counties, a report by Appraisal Group One says.
The appraisal firm's study was commissioned by a Calumet County affiliate of the state Coalition for Wisconsin Environmental Stewardship, a group that is opposing We Energies' Glacier Hills wind farm project in Columbia County and seeks to preserve local control over wind-siting decisions.
The study was released days before the Legislature is expected to take up a wind-siting reform bill aimed at providing standardized permitting procedures for wind power projects across the state.
A representative of the American Wind Energy Association declined to comment on the study. We Energies spokesman Brian Manthey said the utility was still reviewing the report, but he said it's hard to judge how much the decline in property values was caused by proximity to turbines, given that the decline also occurred during the housing market's collapse and the worst economy in generations.
"The times that we are in really make it difficult to say . . . what is affecting home sales or land sales," he said.
Bob Welch, who is lobbying on behalf of the anti-wind group, said he hoped legislators will take a second look at the siting bill in light of the report, saying the bill in Madison would stop local governments from setting restrictions requiring turbines to be located far from homes.
The bill would essentially give the issue to the state Public Service Commission, which would set up a proceeding to determine proper setbacks for wind turbines and other siting issues.
Kurt Kielisch, president of Appraisal Group One, said his study found living near wind turbines has a bigger impact on property values than other studies he's done. His other studies have examined the impact of transmission lines and gas pipelines on property values.
The study found an average price decline of 30% to 40% in land values for property sales that were near turbines.
The main objection, he said, is aesthetics.
"The focus of people who move to the country is kind of to be left alone to enjoy the quiet and the scenery, and when you have things changing the scenery like windmills tend to do, that puts more of an industrial urban feel into the country," he said.
The firm's study's findings run counter to a national study that issued a preliminary finding this year that found "no statistical evidence that homes near wind facilities are stigmatized by those facilities as compared to other homes in the region."
That study, by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, reviewed wind projects in 10 states including a wind farm in Kewaunee County.
Ben Hoen, a co-author of the Berkeley study, said Friday that he could not comment on the Wisconsin case. The Berkeley study was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, he said in an e-mail.
Supporters of the wind-permitting legislation said Friday that they don't expect the study to delay the state's action on the wind-siting reform bill.
"This is sort of the classic tactic of the wind opponents," wind industry lobbyist Curt Pawlisch said. "Come up with something and throw it in and see what happens. This is one more reason why you need to have a calm setting, through a deliberative rulemaking process at the PSC."
The study found property values have fallen by at least 19% for sales of land near the We Energies wind farm in Fond du Lac County, and at least 12% for sales of land near Invenergy LLC's Forward Wind project in Fond du Lac and Dodge counties, a report by Appraisal Group One says.
The appraisal firm's study was commissioned by a Calumet County affiliate of the state Coalition for Wisconsin Environmental Stewardship, a group that is opposing We Energies' Glacier Hills wind farm project in Columbia County and seeks to preserve local control over wind-siting decisions.
The study was released days before the Legislature is expected to take up a wind-siting reform bill aimed at providing standardized permitting procedures for wind power projects across the state.
A representative of the American Wind Energy Association declined to comment on the study. We Energies spokesman Brian Manthey said the utility was still reviewing the report, but he said it's hard to judge how much the decline in property values was caused by proximity to turbines, given that the decline also occurred during the housing market's collapse and the worst economy in generations.
"The times that we are in really make it difficult to say . . . what is affecting home sales or land sales," he said.
Bob Welch, who is lobbying on behalf of the anti-wind group, said he hoped legislators will take a second look at the siting bill in light of the report, saying the bill in Madison would stop local governments from setting restrictions requiring turbines to be located far from homes.
The bill would essentially give the issue to the state Public Service Commission, which would set up a proceeding to determine proper setbacks for wind turbines and other siting issues.
Kurt Kielisch, president of Appraisal Group One, said his study found living near wind turbines has a bigger impact on property values than other studies he's done. His other studies have examined the impact of transmission lines and gas pipelines on property values.
The study found an average price decline of 30% to 40% in land values for property sales that were near turbines.
The main objection, he said, is aesthetics.
"The focus of people who move to the country is kind of to be left alone to enjoy the quiet and the scenery, and when you have things changing the scenery like windmills tend to do, that puts more of an industrial urban feel into the country," he said.
The firm's study's findings run counter to a national study that issued a preliminary finding this year that found "no statistical evidence that homes near wind facilities are stigmatized by those facilities as compared to other homes in the region."
That study, by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, reviewed wind projects in 10 states including a wind farm in Kewaunee County.
Ben Hoen, a co-author of the Berkeley study, said Friday that he could not comment on the Wisconsin case. The Berkeley study was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, he said in an e-mail.
Supporters of the wind-permitting legislation said Friday that they don't expect the study to delay the state's action on the wind-siting reform bill.
"This is sort of the classic tactic of the wind opponents," wind industry lobbyist Curt Pawlisch said. "Come up with something and throw it in and see what happens. This is one more reason why you need to have a calm setting, through a deliberative rulemaking process at the PSC."
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Maine Medical Association adopts resolution on wind energy and public health
Maine Medical Association
Resolution RE: Wind Energy and Public Health
WHEREAS, proposals to locate and build wind energy facilities in the State have at times proven controversial, due to concerns regarding potential effects of such facilities on the public health, and
WHEREAS, the trade off between the public good of generating electricity and the adverse health effects warrant appropriate evidence-based scientific research, and
WHEREAS, assessing the potential health impact of wind turbines has been difficult to measure but if present would be of significant concern. This is especially apparent regarding the noise level and other noise characteristics specific to industrial wind turbines, and
WHEREAS, there is a need for modification of the State's regulatory process for siting wind energy developments to reduce the potential for controversy regarding siting of grid-scale wind energy development and to address health controversy with regulatory changes to include, but not limited to:
a) Refining certain procedures of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and the Maine Land Use Regulation Commission to reflect scientific evidence regarding potential health effects, and to further explore such potential health effects;
b) Judging the effects of wind energy development on potential public health by avoiding unreasonable noise and shadow flicker effects, with development setbacks and incorporating upto date noise regulations specific for industrial wind turbines adequate to protect public health and safety.
Therefore be it resolved that the Maine Medical Association work with health organizations and regulatory agencies to provide scientific information of known medical consequences of wind development in order to help safeguard human health and the environment.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Maine Medical Association 1) work with other stakeholders to encourage performance of studies on health effects of wind turbine generation by independent qualified researchers at qualified research institutions; 2) ensure that physicians and patients alike are informed of evidence-based research results.
Resolution RE: Wind Energy and Public Health
WHEREAS, proposals to locate and build wind energy facilities in the State have at times proven controversial, due to concerns regarding potential effects of such facilities on the public health, and
WHEREAS, the trade off between the public good of generating electricity and the adverse health effects warrant appropriate evidence-based scientific research, and
WHEREAS, assessing the potential health impact of wind turbines has been difficult to measure but if present would be of significant concern. This is especially apparent regarding the noise level and other noise characteristics specific to industrial wind turbines, and
WHEREAS, there is a need for modification of the State's regulatory process for siting wind energy developments to reduce the potential for controversy regarding siting of grid-scale wind energy development and to address health controversy with regulatory changes to include, but not limited to:
a) Refining certain procedures of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and the Maine Land Use Regulation Commission to reflect scientific evidence regarding potential health effects, and to further explore such potential health effects;
b) Judging the effects of wind energy development on potential public health by avoiding unreasonable noise and shadow flicker effects, with development setbacks and incorporating upto date noise regulations specific for industrial wind turbines adequate to protect public health and safety.
Therefore be it resolved that the Maine Medical Association work with health organizations and regulatory agencies to provide scientific information of known medical consequences of wind development in order to help safeguard human health and the environment.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Maine Medical Association 1) work with other stakeholders to encourage performance of studies on health effects of wind turbine generation by independent qualified researchers at qualified research institutions; 2) ensure that physicians and patients alike are informed of evidence-based research results.
Physicians Discuss Wind Energy And Health
BAR HARBOR (NEWS CENTER) -- At the Maine Medical Association's annual meeting, the group took up the issue of wind energy and public health.
The MMA approved a resolution, submitted by Dr. Albert Aniel and Dr. Michael Nissenbaum, to encourage studies of the health effects of wind turbines. The resolution states that the MMA will work with health organizations and regulatory agencies to inform the public of those findings.
"It's just appropriate that we check to see are those questions justified or not," said Dr. Kenneth Christian, an MMA member. "And that would be true whether this is a wind installation, whether it's a factory, whether it's a nuke plant, whatever."
Some people who live near existing wind farms, including the one in Mars Hill, have reported symptoms such as headaches and depression as a result of the noise and shadow flickers from the turbines.
NEWS CENTER
The MMA approved a resolution, submitted by Dr. Albert Aniel and Dr. Michael Nissenbaum, to encourage studies of the health effects of wind turbines. The resolution states that the MMA will work with health organizations and regulatory agencies to inform the public of those findings.
"It's just appropriate that we check to see are those questions justified or not," said Dr. Kenneth Christian, an MMA member. "And that would be true whether this is a wind installation, whether it's a factory, whether it's a nuke plant, whatever."
Some people who live near existing wind farms, including the one in Mars Hill, have reported symptoms such as headaches and depression as a result of the noise and shadow flickers from the turbines.
NEWS CENTER
Under Attack by Wind Companies and Ontario Government
I am a small rural landowner north of you in the Madawaska Valley and we have been literally “under attack” by the wind companies and our very own Ontario government for well into two years now by having our small communities designated as potential wind farm hosts.
We went through the “public consultation” that you have just experienced and like yourselves could not get any answers for our questions and no replies to written requests afterwards. Fellow landowners were approached to lease their land to these developers and offered cash money to sign leases that would make one wonder if there was such a thing as honesty left in today’s society. These landowners are now obliged to allow these wind companies to use their land for a minimum of 20 years with an option for the companies to force another 20 year lease and on top of that another 20 year lease and another totaling 80 years of use without getting out of it. In addition the landowners would be forced by a gag order never to talk publicly about it.
Needless to say our small towns are now split with brother against brother and neighbour against neighbour.
My advise to anyone considering signing a lease with one of these companies is to take the easy way out! Just sell your land before any wind farm is built and move away. You’ll get much more money for it on the market and you won’t get sick when the blades start to turn and you won’t have your land devalued to the point that only the wind company will want it at a price much below market levels.
A better idea! Tell the wind company to “hit the road!”
CARL BROMWICH
Renfrew County
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Adverse health effects from wind turbines in Sweden and the Netherlands
Two noise surveys from Europe are frequently cited by energy industry defenders as evidence that there are no ill health effects found in people living near industrial wind turbines. The applicability of these surveys to most proposed and recently built facilities, however, is very limited. And in fact, their findings of significant annoyance at low sound levels and small relatively turbines suggest reason for concern. Annoyance from noise, by the way, is an adverse health effect, according to the World Health Organization (“Guidelines for Community Noise”, 1999), as is disturbed sleep, which can lead to many physical and psychological symptoms.
The survey from Sweden is: Pedersen and Persson Waye, 2007, “Wind turbine noise, annoyance and self-reported health and wellbeing in different living environments”, Occupational and Environmental Medicine 64 (7): 480-486. The survey from the Netherlands is: Van den Berg, Pedersen, Bouma, and Bakker, Project WINDFARMperception, 2008, “Visual and acoustic impact of wind turbine farms on residents”, FP6-2005-Science-and-Society-20 project no. 044628. Nina Pierpont provides a medical critique of the latter study on pages 111-118 of her book Wind Turbine Syndrome. Note that none of the survey authors are physicians, and neither the design of nor the conclusions from the surveys are reliable medically.
Here, I will simply describe what these surveys found and why they are not very relevant to current debates about wind turbine siting near homes. The general aim is to minimize the increase of noise, especially at night inside people’s bedrooms. The World Health Organization says that the noise level at night inside a bedroom should not exceed 30 dB(A) and that to ensure that level, the noise 1 meter away from the house should not exceed 45 dB(A). Ontario requires that the noise level 30 meters from the house should not exceed 40 dB(A).
In the Swedish survey (Pedersen and Persson Waye, 2007), the average sound level estimated at the respondents’ homes was 33.4 ± 3.0 dBA. The average distance from the turbines was 780 ± 233 m (2,559 ± 764 ft), and facilities of turbines down to 500 kW in size were included.
In the Dutch survey (Van den Berg et al., 2008), only 26% of the turbines were 1.5 MW or above, and 66% of them were smaller than 1 MW. Only 9% of the respondents lived with an estimated noise level from the turbines of more than 45 dB.
With such little exposure to potentially disturbing noise, it would be surprising indeed to find much health effect. And just so are they quoted. For example, from Pedersen and Persson Waye: “A-weighted SPL [sound pressure level] was not correlated to any of the health factors or factors of wellbeing asked for in the questionnaire”; “In our study no adverse health effects other than annoyance could be directly connected to wind turbine noise”.
But note that they did find a substantial level of annoyance, especially in rural areas and hilly terrain, and, as they note, “Annoyance is an adverse heath effect.” And: “Annoyance was further associated with lowered sleep quality and negative emotions. This, together with reduced restoration possibilities may adversely affect health.”
And from Van den Berg et al.: “There is no indication that the sound from wind turbines had an effect on respondents’ health …”.
The elided part of the sentence is: “except for the interruption of sleep”.
Again, they found a substantial level of sleep disturbance and annoyance. They note: “From this study it cannot be concluded whether these health effects are caused by annoyance or vice versa or whether both are related to another factor” (such as low-frequency noise). In other words, the data are inadequate for making any statement regarding health effects (and remember, annoyance, along with interruption of sleep, is a health effect). “Annoyance with wind turbine noise was associated with psychological distress, stress, difficulties to fall asleep and sleep interruption.” “From this and previous studies it appears that sound from wind turbines is relatively annoying: at the same sound level it causes more annoyance than sound from air or road traffic.”
In conclusion, even in the low-impact situations surveyed in these studies (small turbines, setbacks large enough to ensure low A-weighted noise levels), health effects, particularly due to annoyance and sleep disturbance, were seen. With larger turbines and facilities and smaller setbacks from homes, adverse health effects would clearly be expected to affect more people and to a greater degree.
The survey from Sweden is: Pedersen and Persson Waye, 2007, “Wind turbine noise, annoyance and self-reported health and wellbeing in different living environments”, Occupational and Environmental Medicine 64 (7): 480-486. The survey from the Netherlands is: Van den Berg, Pedersen, Bouma, and Bakker, Project WINDFARMperception, 2008, “Visual and acoustic impact of wind turbine farms on residents”, FP6-2005-Science-and-Society-20 project no. 044628. Nina Pierpont provides a medical critique of the latter study on pages 111-118 of her book Wind Turbine Syndrome. Note that none of the survey authors are physicians, and neither the design of nor the conclusions from the surveys are reliable medically.
Here, I will simply describe what these surveys found and why they are not very relevant to current debates about wind turbine siting near homes. The general aim is to minimize the increase of noise, especially at night inside people’s bedrooms. The World Health Organization says that the noise level at night inside a bedroom should not exceed 30 dB(A) and that to ensure that level, the noise 1 meter away from the house should not exceed 45 dB(A). Ontario requires that the noise level 30 meters from the house should not exceed 40 dB(A).
In the Swedish survey (Pedersen and Persson Waye, 2007), the average sound level estimated at the respondents’ homes was 33.4 ± 3.0 dBA. The average distance from the turbines was 780 ± 233 m (2,559 ± 764 ft), and facilities of turbines down to 500 kW in size were included.
In the Dutch survey (Van den Berg et al., 2008), only 26% of the turbines were 1.5 MW or above, and 66% of them were smaller than 1 MW. Only 9% of the respondents lived with an estimated noise level from the turbines of more than 45 dB.
With such little exposure to potentially disturbing noise, it would be surprising indeed to find much health effect. And just so are they quoted. For example, from Pedersen and Persson Waye: “A-weighted SPL [sound pressure level] was not correlated to any of the health factors or factors of wellbeing asked for in the questionnaire”; “In our study no adverse health effects other than annoyance could be directly connected to wind turbine noise”.
But note that they did find a substantial level of annoyance, especially in rural areas and hilly terrain, and, as they note, “Annoyance is an adverse heath effect.” And: “Annoyance was further associated with lowered sleep quality and negative emotions. This, together with reduced restoration possibilities may adversely affect health.”
And from Van den Berg et al.: “There is no indication that the sound from wind turbines had an effect on respondents’ health …”.
The elided part of the sentence is: “except for the interruption of sleep”.
Again, they found a substantial level of sleep disturbance and annoyance. They note: “From this study it cannot be concluded whether these health effects are caused by annoyance or vice versa or whether both are related to another factor” (such as low-frequency noise). In other words, the data are inadequate for making any statement regarding health effects (and remember, annoyance, along with interruption of sleep, is a health effect). “Annoyance with wind turbine noise was associated with psychological distress, stress, difficulties to fall asleep and sleep interruption.” “From this and previous studies it appears that sound from wind turbines is relatively annoying: at the same sound level it causes more annoyance than sound from air or road traffic.”
In conclusion, even in the low-impact situations surveyed in these studies (small turbines, setbacks large enough to ensure low A-weighted noise levels), health effects, particularly due to annoyance and sleep disturbance, were seen. With larger turbines and facilities and smaller setbacks from homes, adverse health effects would clearly be expected to affect more people and to a greater degree.
An Assessment of Danish wind power: The real state-of-play and its hidden costs
As mentioned above, the Danish wind industry is a strong export industry, and this makes a direct comparison with Obama’s plan difficult with regard to actual job creation in the wind industry. It seems highly unlikely that large country’s wind industry such as the US – having a population of more than 50 times the population of Denmark – would be able to replicate the Danish share of exports of wind turbine technology. In that way a US expansion is expected to be predominantly domestic, and at the same time the industry is probably going to face foreign competition from companies such as Vestas, Siemens and new low cost producers in countries like India.
Based on the Danish experiences with wind power, subsidies to wind need to be significant or corresponding taxes on carbon-based electricity need to be increased substantially. The Danish experience also suggests that a strong US wind expansion would not benefit the overall economy. It would entail substantial costs to the consumer and industry, and only to a lesser degree benefit a small part of the economy, namely wind turbine owners, wind shareholders and those employed in the sector.
Windenergy-thecaseofDenmarkfinal11-09-09.pdf
Based on the Danish experiences with wind power, subsidies to wind need to be significant or corresponding taxes on carbon-based electricity need to be increased substantially. The Danish experience also suggests that a strong US wind expansion would not benefit the overall economy. It would entail substantial costs to the consumer and industry, and only to a lesser degree benefit a small part of the economy, namely wind turbine owners, wind shareholders and those employed in the sector.
Windenergy-thecaseofDenmarkfinal11-09-09.pdf
Friday, September 11, 2009
Arkwright Board Tables Request From Horizon
ARKWRIGHT - The Arkwright Town Board spoke with one voice when it unanimously voted to table a Horizon Wind Energy waiver request.
The request involved granting an easement on property Horizon has an option to purchase on Meadows Road that abuts the county owned Earl Cardot Overland Hiking Trail.
Tom Stebbins, Horizon project manager, said he had met with the Chautauqua County Parks Department in November about a situation that arose with the location of a wind turbine on the Meadows Road property.
Stebbins said this involved a 30-foot difference in the town's local wind law requirement for a 1,200-foot setback.
"We want to place the turbine at a 1,170 foot setback and the Parks Department had no problem with that. They consented to the waiver we are asking for," he told the Town Board.
Stebbins also said Fred Bretl, Arkwright Zoning Board of Appeals chairman,told him the waiver is ''the way to go" rather than follow the Zoning Board of Appeal process.
"This way, the waiver request can be considered by the Town Board which has the authority to grant it," Stebbins said.
Councilman Larry Ball said he wasn't sure Arkwright residents wanted the board to say yes right away to the waiver.
"We don't want to appear to be in Horizon's pocket; we have to determine if this waiver is in the town's best interest," Ball said. "I think we should hold off at least one more month before making a decision. We fought long and hard to establish this (wind) ordinance. I don't think the board should willy nilly hand off a waiver."
After a series of questions asked by board members Roger Cardot, Jeff Dietrich, Ball and Linda Fairbanks, the board members unanimously decided to table the waiver request and refer it to the town's wind energy council, Daniel Spitzer, and engineer Robert Adams for review and possible recommendations.
In response to the comments made by the board, Stebbins said he thinks it boils down to a matter of trust. He said he believed it was in the best interest of the town and the Arkwright wind farm lease holders to OK the waiver.
"The wind tower we are seeking the waiver for is one of 43 that are planned for the Arkwright wind farm and according to data we've collected it will be the second highest producing one,'' Stebbins said. ''This means the revenues it generates will increase the amount shared by the town and the leaseholders.''
Fairbanks said she felt Horizon's advantage in this involved having access to the property when it wasn't available to anyone who may have been interested in it.
"If we approve this waiver, will Horizon drop another site and affect the property owner this move will involve?" she asked.
She went on to say Horizon had the advantage of knowing the property, currently owned by the Holy Family Roman Catholic Church, was available for sale.
"I believe if this were known to the public, there would have been others who would be interested in purchasing it," she said.
Horizon is dealing with the Buffalo Diocese, which owns the property once used as a camp and retreat.
Fred Norton, town supervisor, said he thinks Horizon has four options: continue to seek a waiver; apply for a variance; ask the county to move the hiking trail or drop the request.
After the meeting, Dietrich said he was pleased with his fellow board members reaction to this request.
"I have been working all along to protect the residents of Arkwright with regard to this wind farm project and I was glad to see the board's decision Monday," he said.
The request involved granting an easement on property Horizon has an option to purchase on Meadows Road that abuts the county owned Earl Cardot Overland Hiking Trail.
Tom Stebbins, Horizon project manager, said he had met with the Chautauqua County Parks Department in November about a situation that arose with the location of a wind turbine on the Meadows Road property.
Stebbins said this involved a 30-foot difference in the town's local wind law requirement for a 1,200-foot setback.
"We want to place the turbine at a 1,170 foot setback and the Parks Department had no problem with that. They consented to the waiver we are asking for," he told the Town Board.
Stebbins also said Fred Bretl, Arkwright Zoning Board of Appeals chairman,told him the waiver is ''the way to go" rather than follow the Zoning Board of Appeal process.
"This way, the waiver request can be considered by the Town Board which has the authority to grant it," Stebbins said.
Councilman Larry Ball said he wasn't sure Arkwright residents wanted the board to say yes right away to the waiver.
"We don't want to appear to be in Horizon's pocket; we have to determine if this waiver is in the town's best interest," Ball said. "I think we should hold off at least one more month before making a decision. We fought long and hard to establish this (wind) ordinance. I don't think the board should willy nilly hand off a waiver."
After a series of questions asked by board members Roger Cardot, Jeff Dietrich, Ball and Linda Fairbanks, the board members unanimously decided to table the waiver request and refer it to the town's wind energy council, Daniel Spitzer, and engineer Robert Adams for review and possible recommendations.
In response to the comments made by the board, Stebbins said he thinks it boils down to a matter of trust. He said he believed it was in the best interest of the town and the Arkwright wind farm lease holders to OK the waiver.
"The wind tower we are seeking the waiver for is one of 43 that are planned for the Arkwright wind farm and according to data we've collected it will be the second highest producing one,'' Stebbins said. ''This means the revenues it generates will increase the amount shared by the town and the leaseholders.''
Fairbanks said she felt Horizon's advantage in this involved having access to the property when it wasn't available to anyone who may have been interested in it.
"If we approve this waiver, will Horizon drop another site and affect the property owner this move will involve?" she asked.
She went on to say Horizon had the advantage of knowing the property, currently owned by the Holy Family Roman Catholic Church, was available for sale.
"I believe if this were known to the public, there would have been others who would be interested in purchasing it," she said.
Horizon is dealing with the Buffalo Diocese, which owns the property once used as a camp and retreat.
Fred Norton, town supervisor, said he thinks Horizon has four options: continue to seek a waiver; apply for a variance; ask the county to move the hiking trail or drop the request.
After the meeting, Dietrich said he was pleased with his fellow board members reaction to this request.
"I have been working all along to protect the residents of Arkwright with regard to this wind farm project and I was glad to see the board's decision Monday," he said.
House passes $1 billion wind energy bill
The House passed legislation on Wednesday that would initiate a $1 billion program to make wind turbines more efficient and reliable.
The measure, sponsored by Rep. Paul Tonko, D-N.Y., aims to ensure that huge wind-generating turbines - some with blades spanning 100 yards - can be more cost effective in harnessing power from the wind.
Wind power makes up about 2 percent of the nation's electricity portfolio. But the Energy Department last year predicted that with the development of more efficient and cheaper turbines, wind could provide 20 percent of U.S. electricity supplies by 2030.
"Tonko said more research is needed to overcome the "many significant technical issues" facing wind-generated electricity.
One of the biggest barriers is the high cost of transporting ever-growing rotary blades and heavy tower components from assembly plants to wind farms in gusty but often remote regions.
Under Tonko's bill, the proposed wind research, development and demonstration program would get up to $200 million annually over five years to spur the creation of low-cost transportable towers and larger, lighter and more affordable blade materials.
Tonko said the initiative could leverage nanoscience research by businesses and research institutions that are working at the molecular level to create lighter and more durable materials.
The Energy Department program also would be tasked with improving gearbox reliability and developing cheaper automation and assembly techniques for large components. It also would support research on the computational modeling and simulation of wind-energy systems - a direct response to the challenge of generating power from erratic, unpredictable wind.
Scientists testifying before Congress earlier this year said that improved forecasting and modeling techniques could lead to big gains in generation by guiding decisions about where to place turbines.
The legislation passed the House by a unanimous voice vote.
The measure, sponsored by Rep. Paul Tonko, D-N.Y., aims to ensure that huge wind-generating turbines - some with blades spanning 100 yards - can be more cost effective in harnessing power from the wind.
Wind power makes up about 2 percent of the nation's electricity portfolio. But the Energy Department last year predicted that with the development of more efficient and cheaper turbines, wind could provide 20 percent of U.S. electricity supplies by 2030.
"Tonko said more research is needed to overcome the "many significant technical issues" facing wind-generated electricity.
One of the biggest barriers is the high cost of transporting ever-growing rotary blades and heavy tower components from assembly plants to wind farms in gusty but often remote regions.
Under Tonko's bill, the proposed wind research, development and demonstration program would get up to $200 million annually over five years to spur the creation of low-cost transportable towers and larger, lighter and more affordable blade materials.
Tonko said the initiative could leverage nanoscience research by businesses and research institutions that are working at the molecular level to create lighter and more durable materials.
The Energy Department program also would be tasked with improving gearbox reliability and developing cheaper automation and assembly techniques for large components. It also would support research on the computational modeling and simulation of wind-energy systems - a direct response to the challenge of generating power from erratic, unpredictable wind.
Scientists testifying before Congress earlier this year said that improved forecasting and modeling techniques could lead to big gains in generation by guiding decisions about where to place turbines.
The legislation passed the House by a unanimous voice vote.
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
Wind-turbine bill passes in House
WASHINGTON -- The House on Wednesday passed legislation that would launch a $1 billion program to make wind turbines more efficient and reliable.
The measure, sponsored by Rep. Paul Tonko, Democrat of New York, aims to ensure that massive wind-generating turbines -- some with blades spanning 100 yards -- can be more cost effective in harnessing power from the wind.
Right now, wind power makes up about 2 percent of the nation's electricity portfolio. But the Energy Department last year predicted that with the development of more efficient and cheaper turbines, wind could provide 20 percent of U.S. electricity supplies by 2030.
"Wind energy has been and continues to be a very important part of the electricity-generating portfolio in this country, and, in particular, in my state of Texas," said Republican Rep. Ralph Hall. Technology can make "wind turbine systems and farms more efficient and more effective," he said.
Tonko said more research is needed to overcome the "many significant technical issues" facing wind-based electricity generation.
One of the biggest barriers is the high cost of transporting ever-growing rotary blades and heavy tower components from assembly plants to wind farms in gusty but often remote regions.
Under Tonko's bill, the proposed wind research, development and demonstration program would get up to $200 million annually over five years to spur the creation of low-cost transportable towers and larger, lighter and more affordable blade materials.
Tonko said the initiative could leverage nanoscience research by businesses and research institutions that are working at the molecular level to create lighter and more durable materials.
That is especially important as blades continue to grow in size, Tonko said.
The Energy Department program also would be tasked with improving gearbox reliability and developing cheaper automation and assembly techniques for large components. It also would support research on the computational modeling and simulation of wind-energy systems -- a direct response to the challenge of generating power from erratic, sometimes unpredictable wind.
Scientists testifying before Congress earlier this year said that improved forecasting and modeling techniques could lead to big gains in generation by guiding decisions about where to place turbines.
The legislation passed the House by a unanimous voice vote. Tonko said he was working to build support for the measure in the Senate.
If the measure becomes law, it would be up to Congress to appropriate money to the Energy Department program during the annual budget process.
The measure, sponsored by Rep. Paul Tonko, Democrat of New York, aims to ensure that massive wind-generating turbines -- some with blades spanning 100 yards -- can be more cost effective in harnessing power from the wind.
Right now, wind power makes up about 2 percent of the nation's electricity portfolio. But the Energy Department last year predicted that with the development of more efficient and cheaper turbines, wind could provide 20 percent of U.S. electricity supplies by 2030.
"Wind energy has been and continues to be a very important part of the electricity-generating portfolio in this country, and, in particular, in my state of Texas," said Republican Rep. Ralph Hall. Technology can make "wind turbine systems and farms more efficient and more effective," he said.
Tonko said more research is needed to overcome the "many significant technical issues" facing wind-based electricity generation.
One of the biggest barriers is the high cost of transporting ever-growing rotary blades and heavy tower components from assembly plants to wind farms in gusty but often remote regions.
Under Tonko's bill, the proposed wind research, development and demonstration program would get up to $200 million annually over five years to spur the creation of low-cost transportable towers and larger, lighter and more affordable blade materials.
Tonko said the initiative could leverage nanoscience research by businesses and research institutions that are working at the molecular level to create lighter and more durable materials.
That is especially important as blades continue to grow in size, Tonko said.
The Energy Department program also would be tasked with improving gearbox reliability and developing cheaper automation and assembly techniques for large components. It also would support research on the computational modeling and simulation of wind-energy systems -- a direct response to the challenge of generating power from erratic, sometimes unpredictable wind.
Scientists testifying before Congress earlier this year said that improved forecasting and modeling techniques could lead to big gains in generation by guiding decisions about where to place turbines.
The legislation passed the House by a unanimous voice vote. Tonko said he was working to build support for the measure in the Senate.
If the measure becomes law, it would be up to Congress to appropriate money to the Energy Department program during the annual budget process.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)