Documents filed under Noise
Senator Madigan of Victoria in Australia delivered this speech on the floor of the Australian Senate wherein he announces findings from freedom of information requests that show the Waubra wind farm to be noncompliant, yet the agencies responsible for enforcement of the permit(s) say otherwise. In the speech, Senator Madigan explains that Waubra's breaching of its planning permit conditions is part of a broader culture of noncompliance arising from "systemic regulatory failure that impacts every wind farm in Victoria." The Senator's full speech is provided below and can be downloaded by selecting the link on this page.
The "Wind Turbine Health Impact Study: Report of Independent Expert Panel" study says: "The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) in collaboration with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) convened a panel of independent experts to identify any documented or potential health impacts of risks that may be associated with exposure to wind turbines, and, specifically, to facilitate discussion of wind turbines and public health based on scientific findings." It continues, saying: "The scope of the Panel's effort was focused on health impacts of wind turbines per se." The Massachusetts study treats health affects broadly in accordance with WHO and includes direct health effects, annoyance, and sleep disruption. In many ways the Massachusetts study is a critique of the literature relating to wind farm acoustic emissions and health effects. This paper is a critique of the critics. In particular, this critique examines some of the physical acoustic findings and some of the social survey findings. The Massachusetts study reveals itself to have problems similar to those that it criticizes in other reports.
Two weeks ago, in the injunction hearing in the Town of Falmouth vs. the Falmouth Zoning Board of Appeals case where the ZBA decided that the wind turbines were a nuisance to Neil Andersen, both parties presented a 7AM to 7PM agreement to the judge. Falmouth Selectmen subsequently disregarded that agreement and continued to run the wind turbines 5AM to 9PM. One selectboard member advocated running the turbines 24/7 in spite of the Court's request. Hearing this, Superior Court Justice Christopher Muse granted the injunction sought by nearby residents. The order is available by clicking the link on this page.
Dr. Michael Nissenbaum, who conducted extensive research into the effects of of audible wind turbine noise on sleep disturbance, has written a paper that explains his findings to other medical professionals who are unaware of the issue. The summary of his paper appears on this page. The complete document can be accessed by clicking on the link on this page.
This letter, which was read at the Vermilion county board meeting on Monday, October 8, 2013, was written by William C. Mulvaney, the Superintendent of Schools for Armstrong Township High School and Armstrong-Ellis CUD #61 in Illinois. The project is Invenergy's California Ridge with 134 turbines in Vermilion and Champaign counties. The setback at the time of construction was 1000 feet from the foundation of a family home. The setback was later changed to 1200 feet from the foundation. Mr. Mulvaney served on a wind ordinance panel. His message about students and families suffering the impacts of turbine noise and flicker is important.
This useful paper examines the response of study participants to wind turbine noise and associated amplitude modulation sound that is aerodynamically produced by the blades. The authors found that the maximum sound pressure level with fast time A-weighting (LAF max) best explained the annoyance characteristics as compared to the other descriptors considered. Excerpts of the report are provided below. The full study can be downloaded by clicking the links on this page.
In this letter to the Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants (AAAC), Dr. Alec Salt responds to the AAAC's position on wind turbine emissions and infrasound. In particular, Dr. Salt admonishes the AAAC for insisting that low-frequency sound emitted by turbines is no higher than infrasound levels measured at locations where other people live, work and sleep.
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.
This letter, written by William Hallstein, MD, a practicing psychiatrist with over 40 years of experience, was delivered to the Chairman of the Falmouth Board of Health. Dr. Hallstein is also a resident of Falmouth Massachusetts. In his letter he explains the very real impact of the Falmouth turbines on human health.
This important paper examines infrasound and its capacity to affect human health. The paper confirms that moderate strength correlations occur between the incidences of infrasound and reports of nausea, malaise, fatigue, aversion to the area, non-specific pain, and sleep disturbances when pressure levels exceed about 50 db for protracted periods. Because cells interact through the exchange of minute quanta of energy that corresponds with remarkably low levels of sound pressure produced by natural phenomena and wind turbines upon the body and its cavities, traditional standards for safety and quality of living might not be optimal. Included below is an excerpt of the paper pertaining to wind turbines. The full paper can be accessed by clicking the link(s) on this page.
This paper examines the connection between wind turbine noise and the factors that trigger motion sickness. The authors looked at the infrasoundic emissions at the Shirley wind facility in Wisconsin and assessed the frequency of motion sickmess and the possibility of the turbine noise being the cause. Excerpts of the paper are provided below. The full paper can be accessed from the links on this page.
This important published by acoustician, Paul Schomer and others provides an explanation for why some people are experiencing motion sickness and other ill-effects related to wind turbine acoustic emissions. This paper will be presented at the 5th International Conference on Wind Turbine Noise to be held in Denver, Colorado in August 2013. The summary and conclusions of the paper are provided below. The full paper can be accessed by clicking on the links at the bottom of this page.
In testimony provided before the Wisconsin Public Service Commission in reference to the Highland Wind Farm proposal (102.5 megawatts), acoustician Paul Schomer provides important perspective on why modern wind turbines installed today are creating a greater risk to nearby residents. Excerpts of his testimony are provided below. The full testimony can be accessed by clicking on the links at the bottom of this page.
This letter, submitted to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MA DEP) details the appropriate methodology for surveying turbine noise post-construction. The procedure was developed under the guidance of acoustician, Richard James of E-coustics Solutions. The criteria for compliance is specific to the Massachusetts state law regarding noise and will differ from other jurisdictions. However, the procedure should be consistent for all noise surveys. The full report can be accessed by clicking on the link(s) at the bottom of the 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.
Acoustician Nancy S. Timmerman provides an easy to follow discussion of turbine noise studies in the U.S. and Canada and concludes that it's important for scientists and engineers to acknowledge the problem of wind turbine noise and to work to eliminate the problem for affected residents. An excerpt of her paper is provided below, including her summary comments. The full paper can be accessed by clicking the link(s) on this page.
In this paper, each of the two authors has developed single, 24-hour, constant wind turbine noise criteria; the criteria are constants because wind turbine noise is basically not adjustable. Hessler develops his criteria from his knowledge of how wind turbine noise is being regulated at the local, state, and national levels, from regulations in other countries, and from his extensive experience with numerous wind turbine projects. Schomer develops his recommended criteria on the basis of existing national and international standards, notably ISO 1996-1 and ANSI/ASA S12.9 parts 4 and 5. Ultimately, Hessler comes up with a single, 24-hour A-weighted average criterion of 40 dB, and Schomer comes up with a 24-hour, A-weighted average criterion of 39 dB. Although there is essential agreement in immissions criterion, there are variables debated herein for both modeling wind turbine emissions and certifying such emissions at far-off receptors that could result in a 10 dBA difference in the actual immissions level. The introduction and conclusions of the paper are provided below. The full paper can be downloaded from this page.
Wind turbines are rapidly increasing in number. In this paper, the example of the province of Ontario, Canada will be used. The Global Wind Energy Council tracks the world wide installed wind turbines, showing a 10-fold increase in the 10 years from 2001 to 2011 to nearly 240,000 MW. In Ontario the wind turbine capacity has increased over one hundred-fold from about 15 MW in 2003 to about 1700 MW at the end of 2012, and anticipates to continue to more than triple the total wind capacity to 5811 MW by 2015. Health Canada has a study underway on the health effects of wind turbines that will not report before this increase in wind turbine capacity is made. This paper will look at the basis for regulation of the installed wind turbine base in Ontario and investigates consequences of the installations identified already.