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).

Now Marble River’s turbine are on line. The noise is compounded with Noble’s turbine noise levels. The noise and the sun flicker on people’s homes is clearly abuse of the people in their homes. The wind town law of 50 decimals is not acceptable. This law must be changed to protect the people.

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.

Just as we blame the poor for their poverty, we seem compelled to blame the victims of Big Wind for their own illness. Apostles of the wind industry, like Dr. Dora Mills, Dr. Robert McCunney and Australia's Professor Simon Chapman, are only too happy to furnish the tacit explanations needed to justify blaming these victims for their own plight. These typically include psychosomatic causes, hypochondria, delusions, and other forms of mental illness.

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.

Only so many words can describe the harm inflicted by Falmouth's wind power plants. In a few words, the problem remains a matter, not of town fiscal debt or global warming, but rather of only basic acceptable health and living conditions for your neighbors. The history of every place is normally more complicated than what we are lead to believe. Falmouth has the opportunity to keep it simple - value the resident more. Great moments, in the writing of Falmouth's history, are born from great opportunity.

The acoustical firms involved in the sound testing were unanimous, "The four investigating firms are of the opinion that enough evidence and hypotheses have been given herein to classify LFN and infrasound as a serious issue, possibly affecting the future of the industry" and "We recommend additional study on an urgent priority basis..." Scientific study is clearly needed to establish humane and appropriate turbine location setbacks from homes to protect the health and safety of exposed populations.

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.