Documents filed under Impact on People from Europe
The Polish National Institute of Public Health has filed this opinion regarding the construction of industrial wind energy facilities in close proximity to residential areas.
Poland’s President-elect Andrzej Duda declares in this statement that he would push for passing a law preventing the placement of wind energy facilities within a specified distance from homes. The original signed statement is provided on this page in Polish. The English translation is posted below and also can be accessed as an attached document.
The Finland Ministry of Social Affairs and Health prepared this report in order to ensure health protection is involve in connection with the planning and construction of wind power plants. A major objective of health protection is also to prevent health hazards. According to the Ministry, "the cheapest and absolutely best way of implementing health protection is hazard prevention as early as at the planning stage." Excerpts of the report are provided below. The full report can be accessed by clicking the link(s) on this page.
Tribunal de Grande in Montpellier in France found that the visual and audible impacts of an operating wind facility on the owners of the Eighteenth Century Château de Flers in the northern French province of Nord-Pas-de-Calais were unreasonable and ordered the ten turbines be removed. A summary of the Tribunal's ruling is provided below. The full order can be found by clicking the link(s) on this page.
NHS Shetland’s director of public health Dr Sarah Taylor conducted a literature review of studies produced over the past 10 years on the effects of wind turbines have on people’s health. The summary of Dr. Taylor's report is provided below. The full document can be accessed by clicking on the links at the bottom of this page.
This open letter written by Mauri Johansson, MD, MHH, a specialist in Community and Occupational Medicine, reveals important information about the impacts of wind energy development on communities in Denmark and how these impacts are being exported to other countries.
This important ruling by the Portuguese Supreme Court determined that noise emissions from a four turbine facility had resulted in severe impacts on a family living and working nearby. A lower court recommended that the turbines suspend operations from dusk to dawn but the Supreme Count found this decision was unacceptable since the turbines made noise during the day. The court ordered suspension of the total operation of wind turbine nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 both day and night and the defendant, therefore, remove them. The defendant was also ordered to pay the plaintiffs as compensation the sum of thirty thousand euros. A portion of the ruling is provided below. The full ruling can be accessed by clinking the link(s) on this page.
In this scientific policy advisory report, the Superior Health Council of Belgium answers questions on the impact on health and well-being of siting wind farms in residential areas, placed in a context of sustainable development. The Superior Health Council formulates general recommendations as well as recommendations linked to specific physical environmental factors in order to develop onshore wind energy in a socially acceptable way, taking a quality of life perspective.
This useful analysis examines many of the key issues raised before the Courts in the United Kingdom regarding wind turbine noise nuisance cases. An excerpt of the paper is provided below. The full report can be accessed by clicking on the link at the bottom of this page.
This important document critiques the ETSU-R-97 environmental assessment of noise from wind turbines in the United Kingdom. The ETSU-R-97 was written by a Noise Working Group (NWG) set up in 1995 by the Department of Trade and Industry through ETSU (the Energy Technology Support Unit). The noise policy is still in effect today and followed by wind developers outside of the United Kingdom.
This brief filed by sleep expert, Dr. Christopher Hanning, reviews the potential consequences of wind turbine noise and, in particular, its effect on sleep and health and to make recommendations with regard to minimum setback distances. Dr. Hanning considers whether, in the absence of new national guidance should there be minimum or recommended separation distances between commercial scale wind developments and residential properties and other sensitive developments?”
In 2006, Mr Julian and Mrs Jane Davis' quiet enjoyment of their property had been disturbed by a nearby wind project to such an extent that they were forced to vacate their house, for health reasons. The Lincolnshire Valuation Tribune ruled that construction of the turbines 930 metres away from the dwellings had a significant negative effect on Davis; enjoyment of their properties, that the nuisance caused by the turbines was real and not imagined and it would have an effect on the potential sale price of the properties. Excerpts of the ruling are provided below. The full ruling can be accessed by clicking on the link(s) at the bottom of this page.
This paper is based on proofs of evidence produced for several UK Planning Inquiries. As such, it concentrates on the regulatory system in the UK. Other jurisdictions will have different systems.The aim is to inform those seeking to regulate the siting of wind turbines close to human habitation. It will be updated regularly as new information comes to hand. Users are encouraged to check the Society for Wind Vigilance Website for the latest updates.
Jane and Julian Davis filed this complaint before the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division in reference to noise emissions from the eight REpower MM 82 – 2 MW turbines, collectively known as Deeping St Nicholas windcluster. The complaint that was filed with the court on March 8, 2010 seeks injunctive relief to stop the turbines from causing continued nuisance. General damages are also requested for loss of amenity suffered by the Davis' including diminution in value together with costs of renting alternative housing.
In 2006 the UK Government published a crucial report on wind turbine noise and its effects on nearby residents. The study, conducted by acoustics noise and vibration consultants Hayes McKenzie Partnership (HMP), has since been used to support the position that existing Government wind farm noise guidelines were adequate and that there are no health ramifications of turbine noise at neighbouring dwellings. Mr. Mike Hulme of the Den Brook Judicial Review Group, a group of local residents opposing a wind turbine development close to their houses in Devon in the UK, submitted a Freedom of Information (FOI) request asking to see all draft versions of the Hayes McKenzie Partnership (HMP). The documents were finally released to Mr. Hulme and they reveal that the final published report silently removed earlier recommendations on noise. A summary of Mr. Hulme's findings, including three drafts of the study report can be accessed by clicking on the links at the bottom of this page.
This document provides a useful compilation of recent research pertaining to the impact of wind turbines on human health.
Denmark adopted this policy in 2008-2009 which requires developers to pay compensation for loss of value of real property following the erection of the wind turbine. A summary of the policy is cited below. The policy document detailing the process of determining loss and compensation can be accessed by downloading the file linked to this page. This information was obtained from the Danish Energy Agency website.
The Windfarm perception project shows that the sound of wind turbines causes relatively much annoyance. The sound is perceived at relatively low levels and is thought to be more annoying than equally loud air or road traffic. This may be caused by the swishing character of the sound or because at night it does not decrease in strength -which is usually the case for traffic noise. Also in this study more disturbance of sleep occurs at the highest sound levels that occurred in this study. ...In the WINDFARM perception project, supervised by Frits van den Berg, the perception was investigated of modern, tall wind turbines by Dutch residents. The study shows that sound from wind farms is an important disadvantage of wind energy which in itself is positively appreciated by a majority of the participants.
This report gives the results of the EU financed study WINDFARMpertception on how residents perceive a wind farm in their living environment as far as sound and sight are concerned. The study includes a postal survey among Dutch residents (n = 725, response rate: 37%) and an assessment of their aural and visual exposure due to wind farms in their vicinity.
Wind turbines are known to produce shadow flicker by interruption of sunlight by the turbine blades. Known parameters of the seizure provoking effect of flicker, i.e., contrast, frequency, mark-space ratio, retinal area stimulated and percentage of visual cortex involved were applied to wind turbine features. The proportion of patients affected by viewing wind turbines expressed as distance in multiples of the hub height of the turbine showed that seizure risk does not decrease significantly until the distance exceeds 100 times the hub height. Since risk does not diminish with viewing distance, flash frequency is therefore the critical factor and should be kept to a maximum of three per second, i.e., sixty revolutions per minute for a three-bladed turbine. On wind farms the shadows cast by one turbine on another should not be viewable by the public if the cumulative flash rate exceeds three per second. Turbine blades should not be reflective.