Impact on People
Note: counts do not include items in sub-categories
Before you obediently give over this state to a massive waste of money and environmental damage, research the turbines and learn why this cannot work. (And not the page the sellers put out -- they want money and really don't appear to care about honesty. There are many letters to editors in other states from people who were lied to by the wind developers.) Then advocate for power that does work, does not leave the East Coast in the dark and is commercially viable.
The answer is that electricity generated on Steens is destined for Southern California. Oregonians stand to see one of their most beautiful wilderness areas spoiled so Californians can keep their air conditioners on high. Why not send the current overload to California? Why not build the turbines there?
Wind turbines in particular are being splashed across the countryside because, like the 1898 Yukon Gold Rush, there's lots of gold in them thar' wind turbines.
Yet, are they as green as the promoters -- including the provincial government -- would have us suppose?
Last October, Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound MPP Bill Murdock called for a province-wide moratorium on wind turbine projects which would have forced the provincial medical and environmental experts to conduct proper epidemiological investigations of the full impact on human health.
In Ontario alone there are 115 known and documented reports of residents suffering adverse health effects from wind installations and there are less than 700 turbines in operation. Not very good odds are they? Add to this that problems are seriously underreported due to gag clause restrictions, fear of property devaluation when one speaks publicly, fear of loss of privacy if reporting, and fear of upsetting community harmony.
These turbines emit a pulsing, swishing noise that never stops, and the low frequency noise and infrasound they emit is a very serious concern for populations exposed constantly in their homes. Worldwide, people are reporting sleep disturbance, dizziness, headaches, and a host of other symptoms.
They are preparing to sacrifice the village of Zurich and just look the other way.
The $1-billion wind-farm deal is all well and good for some - the government coffers, big American business and a few farmers - who will benefit, but not those of us in the village of Zurich who will be surrounded by these farms.
The prospect of cheaper "green" electricity, even at significant cost to private citizens, appears to be totally acceptable to these entrepreneurial wind developers, and now with the Department of Energy in Washington DC involved, actually "exciting." However, for many of the 106 Vinalhaven households within the 1.5 mile FIW noise umbrella, the daily turbine experience is vastly different. Our feelings of "excitement" would best be described as outrage.
What we have here are miles and miles of visual pollution. Those who imagined that a wind farm would consist of a half dozen or so wind turbines scattered about in the boonies should take the drive. By some estimates, the hundreds of wind turbines produce enough energy to power a city of 250,000. Imagine what it would have to look like to power a city of 3 million.
Deep divisions have arisen across Victoria, with neighbour pitted against neighbour, as some land owners erect wind turbines on their properties - often 60m tall with 30m blades. It's pretty good money, sometimes $10,000 a turbine a year. In the midst of a drought, that can feed a family and send kids to school.
But what of the neighbours?
Bad enough McGuinty's "Premier Dad/Mr. Rogers" public persona hides a politically thuggish "green" energy agenda that makes no environmental or practical sense.
Bad enough our Dalton-come-lately to the issue of climate change, who didn't know the difference between air pollution and greenhouse gases when elected in 2003, now has the gall to dismiss anyone opposed to having industrial wind factories rammed down their throats as NIMBYS.
I was appalled by the state Department of Health Services' presentation at the May 25 meeting of Brown County Health/ Safety committees: "There is not sufficient evidence to conclude causal or associated link between wind turbines and health outcomes."
No matter how much or how little generation we have, industrial scale wind turbines will never make a difference. They are unpredictably intermittent and there has been no circumstance where building wind plants has resulted in the decommissioning of an existing fossil fuel facility.
Industrial wind projects divide communities, lower property values, will harm Vermonters' health, wildlife, tourist and second-home economy, and kill birds and endangered bats.
"There is a lot of work to be done," says Joyce McLean, Toronto Hydro's director of strategic issues. "We're talking four or five years before we'd see any wind turbines here." ...Wind is not lacking. But support for this project may be harder to locate. Ms. McLean confesses that, "We have some very vocal opponents, and we were surprised at the velocity of their opposition."
The governments of Ontario and Canada have a policy to implement renewable energy generation including that from industrial wind turbines.
This policy has been established without conducting third party "front end" human health studies to determine authoritative guidelines designed to protect health. To date, there are no peer reviewed studies demonstrating that industrial wind turbines are safe near families.
As Bob Messner noted last week, industrial wind power is a valuable renewable energy source with positive potential-in the right places. A community whose character and economy are lifestyle-based is not one. Another of Jane Davis' comments makes a good closer: "For people living near wind farms, both now and in the future, it will be a disaster.... This isn't about Nimbyism, but the rights of ordinary people to live a normal life."
It would behoove us as citizens to do as much research as possible to understand the full ramifications of the impact before these [wind farm] are installed. Once they go in, they are here to stay. A once thriving community will be dismantled -- forever.
Over the past week or so, two reports from Ontario have spurred a fair amount of notice and comment among those following wind development issues. The Acoustic Ecology Institute comments on the reports' conclusions.
As an active professional working to save Maine's mountaintops, I've met and have dealt with large groups who are opposed to improper siting of wind factories. We all agree that much larger and more efficient wind factories in the ocean beyond sight of shore, where wind is better and more reliable, makes more sense. To say we are against wind power is a falsehood.
As to the sound problems that Aniel argues, the Maine Medical Association agrees with her, not Dr. Dora Anne Mills.