Impact on People
Note: counts do not include items in sub-categories
But anyone who has been close enough to such behemoths, either along the highways in southern Spain, on the coast of Nova Scotia, near the sand dunes on Prince Edward Island and in southern Alberta, knows that they are noisy and intrusive, regardless of their green credentials. Nobody in his right mind would want to live within earshot of these things.
What I have found particularly intriguing is the consistent and almost automatic dismissal of the health impacts for those colocated with the turbines. I have listened to people arbitrarily dismiss health issues as being psychosomatic or regurgitate the popular excuse of the lack of scientific evidence. With respect, I would suggest to those who support these notions that you have completely misunderstood the problem.
Dr. Lynn is right. More study is needed on the effects of wind farms on everything from the future cost of electricity to health concerns. And local planning control must be restored as a first step by the government towards making amends to the people of rural Ontario.
Characteristic noises would include the footfalls of deer. "I have not seen a deer here since construction began," said Meyer, and the owls and hawks that used to frequent his woodlot are gone, too. While someone choosing to live near a freeway is moving next to the noise nowadays (since we're not building new freeways), in the case of wind farms, the noise is moving in.
If the PSC guidelines didn't reflect the state real estate association data on decreased property values, and if the industry cannot guarantee acceptable sound levels prior to construction, then the risk is all mine.
As long as there is not a clear and easy recourse to be sure my rights and property values are protected, I will object.
Being a scientific sort of chap, McMurtry began by researching the issue.
What he discovered alarmed him. In particular, he ran into evidence — re-enforced by personal encounters later — that low-frequency humming associated with wind turbines may lead to chronic sleeplessness, stress and even hypertension causing heart disease for anyone living within two kilometres of a machine.
The concerned citizen expects his or her protection to be the guiding principal employed when examining ALL projects, no matter their location. A power plant has it's own unique package of ills. It's comedic classification as a waste water treatment plant has served to bypass those ills, by-pass planning, zoning and health board review, and by-pass the special permit process design to give the common, concerned citizen their say!
Only recently has the Ontario Liberal government stumbled into the fray by stifling local opposition to corporate wind with the Green Energy Act. Their belated attempt to establish a substantial renewable power industry in Ontario is costing Ontario taxpayers dearly with huge subsidies to Samsung and its Korean government-owned partner.
Every business deserves the opportunity to succeed and prosper, but never at the expense of human, animal and environmental health. Unfortunately, the very people that industrial wind turbines are hurting do not have the funds for large display ads to warn people about the truth of the harm and the deceit of the provincial government's renewable energy policy.
The BRSA is trying to force the turbine down the throats of the communities it serves and has irresponsibly spent more than $2 million on the project.
By not first acquiring the additional land and ensuring that all permits were completed, it has put the ratepayers it serves at risk.
The ambient noise in rural environments such as Silcote Corners is from 25- 30 decibels, since it is not influenced by other background noises of traffic, industry and the like.
So the question becomes, how disruptive is noise of 40-45 decibels from an industrial complex (such as the wind farm) when it is located in a natural environment with an ambient noise level of 25- 30 decibels (or 15-20 decibels less)?
The ongoing expansion of wind power is an intrusion into the countryside, with a extent and effect comparable with the 1900s expansion of hydro power in the rivers in north Sweden. Wind turbines have a significant visual impact on landscape and the anxiety that they create must be taken seriously. There has been no serious research into how they affect people. It can almost be considered a violation of human rights when local opinions are met with indifference by government authorities.
Cape May is now facing a different kind of accommodation with the modern age, one that pits often-allied historic and environmental interests against each other: Green power.
The city's Historic Preservation Commission is asking City Council wants to ban windmills and only wants solar systems in the historic district that can't be seen from the street.
On page 5 of a GE Energy document titled "Wind Energy Basics", it states, "Siting wind turbines and assessing the feasibility of a proposed location must consider factors such as Community Acceptance and compatibility with adjacent land uses. ... Hence, megawatt-scale wind turbines cannot be located in densely populated areas."
In Union Beach a "densely populated area" begins 1,080 feet from the Bayshore Regional Sewerage Authority's site for their proposed 380-foot-tall GE industrial wind turbine.
Given its natural beauty, why would anyone want to erect 43 steel towers on this landscape? According to the Manitoulin Coalition for Safe Energy Alternatives, the wind turbines destined for McLean's Mountain will be 26 stories high. ...An industrial-scale wind turbine installation does not suit this landscape.
Wind turbine companies have signed leases in the areas surrounding Stratford, Mitchell, Sebringville and St. Marys and are currently canvassing Fullarton and Hibbert wards. Once leases are signed, our neighbourhoods will become what every other community with turbines have become: divided, neighbour against neighbour, communities split because of secrecy and fear of the health problems that develop.
The proposed project to install seven 492 ft tall Wind Turbines within 800 ft of residences does not meet any of the criteria for responsible siting of wind turbines. This project is probably one of the most irresponsible proposals ever submitted for Cape Cod. We therefore must reject the project in its current form.
This begs the question of whether a frequent or constant annoyance can lead to illness of some kind. This is something that deserves consideration ...As well, there's something to be said for requiring all wind-farm developers to offer to purchase any residence within two kilometres of a planned turbine.
The shrillness and sheer emptiness of the McGuinty Liberals' arguments on the energy file has been revealing in recent weeks. It is, I think, a measure of the desperation the provincial government is feeling less than a year away from an election. They realize the anger and resentment they've stirred up in rural Ontario, where they have unleashed their industrial wind energy experiments.
As a neighbor of the wind turbine farm, this year has been a journey from hope to anger and disgust. ...Our experience has forced me to look into the deeper issues of industrial wind - the technology, economics and politics - and the investigation has been an uncomfortable journey. It has brought my once-honey-eyed vision of easy, green power to the conclusion that industrial wind energy is, at present, bad science, bad economics and bad politics.
Also filed under [