Ostrander Point:  All the witnesses have been heard

Today was the end of a long and exhausting journey for the members of PECFN, the supporters of our fight to Save Ostrander Point, our legal team and probably the opposing lawyers and the tribunal panel as well.  The last of the witnesses was heard this morning.  Shawn Taylor, a witness for the approval holder (Gilead) gave testimony about his success in aquatic and terrestrial rehabilitation projects.  In some projects, apparently, he was involved in creating artificial nesting sites for Blanding’s Turtles.  There did not seem to be any evidence; however, that the turtles actually used these artificial sites. Most of Mr. Taylor’s work seems to have been in restoration of wetland habitat for road construction.

The second witness for the day was to have been Mike Lord, president of Gilead.  After the lunch break the Gilead lawyers came back and announced that Mike Lord would not be giving testimony.

Everyone in the room gave a huge sigh of relief – we could not believe it was finally over.

Before January 15, the legal teams will be submitting written briefs and replies summing up the case. On the 15^th final oral submissions will be presented in Toronto and then the ERT panel will deliberate and write their final decision.

Meanwhile, PECFN continues raising funds.  On January 16 we present Winter Wonderland Walk.  This 3 km walk will proceed along Hilltop Rd and up Brewers Rd to Long Dog winery.  Long Dog has graciously agreed to provide mulled wine for the walkers and we will make sure there is also hot spiced cider.  We will also provide rides back to your car parked at the side of Hilltop Rd.  All you have to do is register for the walk and get a few people to sponsor you.  It should be a fun afternoon and we will raise some much needed money for the cause of keeping our South Shore Turbine free.

Register for Winter Wonderland Walk by contacting Cheryl Anderson at cherylanderson23@sympatico.ca

ON A BREEZY, sunny day in north-east Germany it seems as though the world is running on renewable energy. Near Altentreptow 50-odd giant wind turbines, the tallest 200 metres high, spin above a potato field, making a gentle swishing sound. The hum from the base of each turbine is the sound of electricity being generated, much of it bound for Berlin. The view from the wind farm, across flat fields, is of another wind farm.

Sadly, this is not how the world’s power is generated. In truth, the view from Altentreptow does not even properly reflect how Germany’s power is generated. The battle to drive carbon dioxide out of the world energy system, which accounts for about two-thirds of human greenhouse-gas emissions, has seen some heartening and visible advances. But clean energy is still being soundly thrashed by the dirty sort.

Even as the wind turbines and solar panels began to spread across the fields of Europe, an ancient black fuel was making a comeback (see chart). In 2000 the world’s coal-fired power stations were capable of producing 1,132 gigawatts of electricity between them, according to Enerdata, a Paris-based research firm. By 2014 so many new power stations had been built that they could put out 1,980 gigawatts. Coal, which is about twice as polluting as natural gas, now supplies 41% of the world’s electricity and 30% of its overall energy needs.

read more: The Economist, Nov 28 2015

Report on Environmental Review Tribunal Hearing on White Pines Wind Project

November 23

by

Henri Garand, APPEC

On Day Twelve the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) on the White Pines wind project heard Dr. Cornelia Baines, witness for the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC).

After confirming the credentials and lengthy research experience of Dr. Baines, MOECC counsel Sylvia Davis asked her to respond to Dr. Hanning’s observations of bias in her witness statement.  She said that the negative phrases were taken from the papers she had referenced and her focus was on following a good scientific approach in research.  The Tribunal qualified Dr. Baines, MD, as a “physician and epidemiologist with special expertise in design, measurement, and evaluation of research studies.”

Dr.  Baines reviewed the hierarchy of research design from the lowest quality (case series and case reports) to the highest (cohort and randomized control studies).  She said that “compelling evidence” of adverse health effects would require that “complaints are specific to wind turbines,” “symptoms would be more frequent and severe than in the general population,” and a “biologically plausible mechanism” would be identified. Continue reading Day 12: Report on ERT on White Pines Wind Project →

Even on paper, it was a wonder: Three expansive circles of shining mirrors supplicating three glowing 500-foot-tall towers, each engineered to turn the sun’s heat into electricity in the otherwise godforsaken Mojave Desert. The Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System offered a sparkling vision of our nature-powered future, whose every gigawatt would keep tons of coal’s heat-trapping pollutants out of the atmosphere.

BrightSource Inc., a company based in Oakland, Calif., would design it. Construction giant Bechtel would build it on 4,000 acres near the California-Nevada border. It would supply clean electricity to 140,000 homes.

In 2010, when Bechtel broke ground on Ivanpah, it held such promise that President Barack Obama worked it into a speech on the nation’s energy. “With projects like this one,” he declared, “we are staking our claim to continued leadership in the new global economy.”

As its miles of glinting glass and radiant columns rose on the landscape, tourists from China and India came on buses to marvel. It attracted a $168 million investment from high-tech giant Google; the U.S. Energy Department backed its $1.6 billion in construction loans. For many energy speculators, environmentalists and green-energy proponents, a long-held dream was finally coming true. “The wasteland of the Mojave Desert,” as one Los Angeles-based energy guru put it, was on its way to becoming the “goldmine of our future energy needs.”

read more: By Judith Lewis Mernit High Country News POSTED: 11/21/2015

During a community liaison meeting in Seaforth at Huron East’s town hall, an engineer who works on several turbines in St. Columban admitted to the public that most statements made by consultants that residents will “never hear” the large fans are dishonesties.

It was a full community conference with almost every chair filled in the council chambers joined by the HEAT group, Veresen Inc., Huron East council members and a few locals. For all those who came, coffee, donuts and a fruit tray were available free of charge. The voice of the HEAT, Jeanne Melady and Gerry Ryan were front-row ready with pens and paper. The two have been present at three out of the last four Huron East council meeting. They expressed their needs to the political gang numerous times, a primary concern was that HEAT did not know who to call. Today was the day to move forward and be heard by the wind turbine company. At a previous council meeting, Huron East was optimistic and sure several questions would be answered at this function.

Dennis Mueller, a representative for the community liaison committee started the two-hour session by directing questions and complaints from members of 14 households that live near these wind turbines. These inquiries were aimed at Veresen Inc. and the senior engineer. Mueller put all these objections on a screen so the public could view these alleged accusations.

“Personally I was appalled when these reports began to come in as I knew there were health problems but had no idea to this severity,” said Mueller.

“The fact that there are also children being affected by this project, I have a huge problem with that as a parent.”

read more: By Shaun Gregory, Huron Expositor Monday, November 23, 2015

Report on Environmental Review Tribunal Hearing on White Pines Wind Project‏‎

November 23

by

Paula Peel, APPEC

Day Eleven of the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) on the White Pines wind project was scheduled to deal with WPD’s witness Robert O’Neill.

However, the hearing began with a request from Eric Gillespie, APPEC’s legal counsel, for full disclosure from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) of the balance of the documents relating to Blanding’s turtles.  Mr. Gillespie advised the ERT that the MNRF has handed over only seven documents although it is clear there are many more.  The Tribunal declined to make a ruling at this time.

Gillespie subsequently provided notice of a motion made on behalf of the appellants that ERT co-chairs Marcia Valiante and Hugh Wilkins recuse themselves from these proceedings.  The Tribunal agreed to receive written submissions on this matter and will make a ruling as soon as possible.  There were no objections to the ERT continuing to hear evidence over the next two days.
The hearing then focused on Robert O’Neill, a sound engineer with Epsilon Association, whom the Tribunal qualified as an acoustician with expertise in wind turbine frequency noise.  During the past ten years he has conducted studies at about 20 operational wind projects. Continue reading Day Eleven: Report on ERT on White Pines Wind Project. Tribunal Chairs facing motion to be recused from hearing →

Report on Environmental Review Tribunal Hearing on White Pines Wind Project

November 20, 2015

by

 Paula Peel, Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County (APPEC)

APPEC’s health appeal continued on Day 10 with expert witness Dr. Paul Schomer testifying before the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) on the White Pines wind project.  The remainder of the day was spent making adjustments to the schedule following WPD’s abrupt announcement that it was dropping an appeal of the disallowance of two turbines (T7 and T11) by the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC).

Dr. Schomer, a former Standards Director of the Acoustical Society of America with 48 years’ experience in noise measurement, was qualified by the ERT as an expert in acoustics.  He told the Tribunal that all residents in the White Pines project area will be affected by audible and inaudible sound and a number of residents will be seriously affected.  The effects reported by people living near wind projects are similar in nature to the effects experienced by participants in a 1985 University of Toronto study on infrasound.  At lower levels and at higher levels of pure tone some participants experienced nausea and dizziness.  However, when overtones were added at higher levels, participants experienced headaches and fatigue.

Dr. Schomer considers that internationally-accepted noise standards and protocols are being flouted in Ontario.  For example, A-weighting is not supposed to be relied on when sounds have low-frequency content such as those emitted by industrial wind turbines.  Canada is one of the countries that voted for this rule.  He also calls for changes in current Ontario regulations to adjust up to 10 db(A) for wind turbine noise in rural areas.  Other suggested adjustments include up to 3 db(A) for weather conditions and 3 to 4 db(A) for locations downwind of turbines.   Dr. Schomer is highly critical of WPD’s current predicted average sound as it merely indicates that 50% of the time 50% of the residents will be exposed to sound above or below the limit.  The wind industry should be held to a higher level of accountability: db(A) limits should be met 95% of the time.

Dr. Schomer pointed to a very important figure in the Health Canada Report.  Only 1% of people are shown to be highly annoyed at 30 – 35 db(A) sound levels.  However, at 35 – 40 db(A) the number jumps to 40%.  Dr. Schomer sees this as evidence of a community response to wind turbine noise, and that what Health Canada says, what independent acoustic experts say, and what communities say should carry weight in Ontario.

Through experience Dr. Schomer has found that when community responses disagree with the physics, the physics is usually wrong.  This has been confirmed by his involvement in six studies of wind farms, including the 8-turbine Shirley Wind Farm in Wisconsin where three families abandoned their homes and about 60 other people reported adverse health effects.

Report on Environmental Review Tribunal Hearing on White Pines Wind Project
November 19, 2015
by
Henri Garand and Paula Peel, APPEC

On Day Nine, APPEC expert witnesses Richard James and Steven Cooper provided acoustical evidence to the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) on the White Pines wind project.

The Tribunal qualified Mr. James as an acoustician on the basis of 40 years’ work experience and testimony at hearings in several American states and six ERTs.

James criticized WPD’s sound propagation modeling. The computer model is based on a single turbine as opposed to a set of turbines, and though specifically limited to one kilometre, it is used for calculations at greater distances. This leads to concerns about understating and under-predicting sound levels and under-representing the worse possible impact. Adjusting for model uncertainty and other factors, James expected a significant increase of 4.2 dB(A) beyond regulations.

While the model suggests compliance with Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) guidelines, James believes that the project will put 23 non-participating noise receptors in excess of 40 dB(A). Many more residences would fall outside MOECC guidelines because the summer/winter profile is flawed by not correcting for wind shear. Furthermore, since MM92 wind turbines have been the subject of a number of lawsuits, Mr. James contends that WPD’s modeling calculations are fundamentally too low.

https://ccsage.wordpress.com/2015/11/20/day-9-of-the-white-pines-ert/

Report on Environmental Review Tribunal Hearing on White Pines Wind Project‏‎
November 18
by
Paula Peel, APPEC

APPEC’s health case proceeded on Day 8 with two experts providing evidence to the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) on the White Pines wind project: Dr. Alum Evans and Dr. Robert McMurtry.

Dr. Evans, Professor Emeritus at Queen’s University in Belfast, Northern Ireland, has studied cardiovascular disease for 30 years. Dr. Evans told the Tribunal that his involvement in wind turbines is tangential to his interest in noise, sleep disturbance, and cardiovascular disease. But he has also met many people severely impacted by wind turbine noise.

Citing published studies, Dr. Evans explained that the major adverse health effects of wind turbines seem to be due to sleep disturbance and sleep deprivation, mainly from loud noise and low-frequency noise (LFN), particularly infrasound. Dr. Evans finds the “impulsive, intrusive and incessant nature” of wind turbine noise a particularly troublesome feature that is highly discernible in rural areas. LFN, which is inaudible, is propagated over long distances and penetrates buildings where it can be amplified by insulation and closed windows. Dr. Evans noted that sleep deprivation is associated with increased likelihood of developing a range of chronic diseases, including Type 2 diabetes, cancer, coronary heart disease, and heart failure. His recent systematic literature review found 18 published studies establishing an association between wind turbine noise and human distress.

While agreeing with James Wilson, counsel for WPD, that “human distress” is not a medical term Dr. Evans said that human distress needs to be taken seriously nonetheless. He also agreed with Wilson that the results of observational studies do not constitute “proof”. But what is important about these studies is the strength of the associations, which are certainly enough to point to the Precautionary Principle.

read more:  https://ccsage.wordpress.com/2015/11/19/day-8-of-the-white-pines-ert/

Schools need to be informed and involved concerning long term negative health impacts.

The following is written by Luann Therrien. November 2015.

As many already know our family resided less than 3/4 of a mile to the nearest Industrial Wind Turbine, 5 were within one mile, all 16 were within two miles. We lived near the project for three years. Abandoned our home of 18 years on December 22, 2014.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

While State officials will not admit to any adverse health impacts from residing in too close proximity of an Industrial Wind Power Plant, they will agree that sleep deprivation has serious impacts on an individual’s health. The sounds being emitted by wind turbines causes annoyance and sleep deprivation and we are still realizing more impacts these sounds have on a body.

We were exposed to various sounds being emitted from the power plant consisting of audible and inaudible sounds (infrasound).

Realize individuals residing around projects may not have the proper information to have any idea of what the symptoms may consist of. This information is also valuable to schools who have students in attendance who live in these areas. The impacts are serious and there fore needs to be taken seriously by everyone including the education system.

Before I continue, feel the need to make clear that through the entire Industrial Wind Power Plant proposal and construction process, we did NOT oppose the project. It was not until after the completion of the project and it went online did we understand we would hear the turbines. Took around six months for us to realize the sounds were impacting us, and almost a year to begin comprehending how severly it was impacting us.

That eye opening day consisted of;
My son did something that made me laugh out loud, a real laugh. In that moment I was shocked to realize that I hadn’t done so in a very long time.
My personality had been changed, am still not the person I used to be. Went from being accused of laughing too much to being prescribed Prozac and Trazadone. This therapy continues. Sought out the aid of a Psychiatrist who has diagnosed my husband and I with PTSD.

Along with evaluations preformed at our children’s schools, we will be setting up appointments with our psychiatrist for our now almost 6 and 4 year olds as they exhibit behaviors that are a concern.

You will find an abundance of information online on the subject of “Wind Turbine Syndrome”. Some you read will state that there are no adverse health impacts in conjunction with Industrial Wind Power. Please keep in mind these studies are typically bought and paid for by the wind industry who profit from the installations. Any studies proclaiming the opposit, are preformed by concerned citizens, Doctors and so on who realize the seriousness the impacts will have on some individuals.

Below you will find a link to our Facebook Group “Victims of Industrial Wind” along with links speaking of the adverse health impacts.

Please involve you schools.

Feel free to contact me,
Luann Therrien
lmttherrien@gmail.com.

Thank you,

Here are just a few links, please investigate and involve your schools

Victim’s of Industrial Wind,
https://m.facebook.com/groups/740453565984169?ref=bookmarks

http://waubrafoundation.org.au/health/symptoms/

http://hearinghealthmatters.org/…/wind-turbine-health-prob…/

http://docs.wind-watch.org/120727-Evidence-of-Adverse-Healt…