These problems were predicted before their construction, but wind developers persuaded future neighbors that there would not be any problems. Now, as more turbines are built near residential areas, post-installation problems are emerging, causing precisely the problems that wind turbine opponents said would happen.

In this piece by Steve Ryack and Bill Lattrell, two members of the Heath (Massachusetts) Renewable Energy Committee, explain the research and analysis conducted by the committee in recommending turbines be limited to 100 feet in height.

Several longtime residents complain of headaches and dramatic reductions in quality of life. "My quiet, peaceful, serene world and home has been turned into a reality of grief, unending noise, annoyance and constant dealing with those in charge to help us," said Michael Fairneny of Florida.

A moratorium on Big Wind Farms in New Hampshire, makes absolute sense. I applaud Representative Harold "Skip" Reilly (R-Grafton) for his forward thinking on this matter. Reilly has proposed legislation calling for a moratorium on all wind power construction until the state updates its energy plan. (HB-580 and HB-484). Get back to basics and start asking important questions.

Why should we spend millions of dollars to destroy wildlife habitat, kill bats and eagles, pollute our headwaters, fill valuable wetlands, polarize our communities, make people sick, mine rare earth metals - just to ensure that we can consume as much or more next year than we did this year? The costs of industrial wind far outweigh the benefits ... unless you are a wind developer.

The Massachusetts Departments of Public Health and Environmental Protection continue endorsing noise guideline and noise sampling protocol tools which, both agencies admit, do not adequately address, nor properly mitigate the unique noise characteristics associated with Industrial Wind Turbines (June 30, 2011 letter from MassDEP to Falmouth Selectmen & Health Agent).

Is wind part of the answer to our need to diversify our energy sources? Yes. Is the Tuttle-Willard ridge the best place for wind power? No. There's too much at stake. Our insatiable appetite for energy shouldn't be a tradeoff for healthy forests and wildlife habitat. As the SEC discusses Antrim Wind Energy's plan, the wind will be blowing on Tuttle Hill. Let's hope the wind keeps blowing through that spruce.

I realized I had a story that was bigger than just the effectiveness of wind energy. You can like it or you can hate it-that isn't the point. What this is about is government and business rushing ahead with new technology without ever making sure it's safe. A car manufacturer would never get away with releasing a new model without extensive safety tests. Same goes for food, appliances-anything. And yet these machines just kept going up, and up, and up.

While society said "enough" when it comes to smoking, especially as it pertains to public spaces and second-hand smoke, the wind industry unapologetically continues to force its harmful product on Wisconsin families - not just intruding on public spaces, but primarily invading people's homes with devastating effects.

Even before they threatened my property, I was opposed to wind farms. They fail on all counts. They are grossly inefficient, extremely expensive, socially inequitable, a danger to human health, environmentally harmful, divisive for communities, a blot on the landscape, and don't even achieve the purpose for which they were designed, namely the reliable generation of electricity and the reduction of CO2 emissions.

Tax dollars fund large portions of these projects in several ways (through grants and loans, subsidies, and tax credits), so in essence WE THE PEOPLE are paying to destroy the natural beauty that not only we enjoy, but we're throwing away the income generated by the tourists who CHOOSE to come here because of our scenic lakes and mountains.

The wind energy lobby doesn't care about families and children currently being harmed or about future families that will be harmed by 500- foot industrial wind turbines. They are not listening, they are either uninformed or are deliberately misrepresenting the facts; it appears they don't care.

We shouldn't dynamite our mountain ridgelines to build a tool that can't achieve our carbon reduction objective. We shouldn't build power plants in the Kingdom when the demand is in Chittenden County. We shouldn't ignore the clear-cutting of hundreds of acres of trees that are our best carbon vacuum cleaners. We shouldn't allow runoff from miles of mountaintop roads and dozens of massive concrete base pads akin to any Wal-Mart parking lot. We shouldn't use a tool that kills off wildlife. How can anyone possibly justify such a tool receiving a permit to take endangered species?

If you don't have a suitable site for a wind turbine, it is folly to investigate which unsuitable site might be the best. ...Cramming one wind turbine into an inappropriate space on shore is not going to do anything meaningful toward the creation of a renewable energy future.

Many in Falmouth town government have been inclined to ‘down-play' the devastating health plight of local residents. Town official chose to promote the turbines for their financial and ‘green' benefit. The required night time curtailment protocol has nullified those expected benefits. The justification from Town Hall for the turbines has dramatically changed. The benefit has mistakenly become a liability. Simply stating the town's case -- "it's just not possible to afford not to operate them."

Acoustician Richard James provides a brief explanation of the Shirley wind farm sound study where four investigating firms found sufficient evidence to classify LFN and infrasound emanating from the turbines as a serious issue, possibly affecting the future of the wind industry.

Far from offering residents any real protection, this latest proposal will have the likely outcome of inviting smaller turbines, in larger numbers, that can still be legally sited in very close proximity to residents. Current zoning bylaws in Fairhaven permit citing turbines in every type of zone as a so-called municipal project.

The Newfound Lake area is a perfect example of green energy gone amuck. All it takes is a foreign, for- profit company and opportunistic landowners. All other N.H. citizens, from business and homeowners in a 100-mile radius suffer the consequences. Every town, ridge, and lake in N.H. could be next. This is a horrifying example of a lack of regulations and a state that needs a comprehensive energy plan.

No more would I trade in blood diamonds or child pornography than I would accept money in any shape or form from Big Wind. The time is long since past when anyone complicit in this vile, corrupt, mendacious industry - not the lawyers, not the engineers, not the land agents, not the investors - could be unaware of the damage it does: to the landscape, to rural communities, to wildlife, to people's health, to the economy generally.

The privately owned WEBB/ NOTUS/TELEDYNE turbine, identicle to the other 2, runs unabated, 24/7 full time and without investigation or much mention in the news. It gets just as many complaints. It has driven me out of my home and others out of their jobs in the tech park. Unfortunately, I know why they skate through untouched. Money talks loudest in Falmouth.