August 17, 2016 in Nova Scotia an Enercon turbine collapsed. The technician working in the turbine was able to exit the turbine safely.
Source: http://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1406395/enercon-investigating-turbine-incident-Canada
“Enercon has launched an investigation into the collapse of a turbine at the 23.3MW Point Tupper wind farm located close to Port Hawkesbury in Nova Scotia, Canada.
The German turbine manufacturer said the incident, which occurred during a component exchange last Wednesday, triggered an evacuation alarm before the turbine collapsed and that nobody was injured.
The wind farm was developed by a joint venture between Canada’s Renewable Energy Services, which is the controlling shareholder, and Nova Scotia Power.
It uses Enercon E-82 and Enercon E-48 turbines, although Enercon did not specify which model was involved in the collapse.
“With close to 1000 wind turbines installed in Canada over the course of the last 15 years, this is the first time that such an event has occurred,” Enercon said in a statement.
A technical team is probing the incident, which did not occur during regular operations and is “undoubtedly an isolated one”, Enercon said…”
READ MORE: http://renews.biz/103859/enercon-probes-canadian-collapse/#.V7srAMS-P6U.twitter
A dramatic multiple turbine collapse event involving 8 Enercon turbines occurred in Brazil during an extreme weather event in 2014.
The issue of turbine failures,setbacks to homes and safety was heard at the tribunal appeal hearing challenging the renewable energy approval granted for the Niagara Wind project. The community was assured by their experts that catastrophic turbine failures and component liberation are rare events and the setbacks in the project are adequate.
The chart below is taken from the closing written reply of Mothers Against Wind Turbines and gives the reader an idea of how close the 3MW Enercon 101 turbines of 124m in height are placed to homes in the Niagara Wind project.
Ontario’s 550 metre setback and noise limits are waived if you agree to host a turbine on your land. Something to ponder in light of the recent “isolated” event.
155. Participating receptors predicted noise exposure levels as extracted from the Niagara Region Wind Farm Noise Assessment Report, September 30, 2014 often exceed the 40 dBA worst case sound power level thresholds detailed in the chart below:
“P” stands for participating
Receptor Number |
Sound Limit in dBA |
Distance to Closet Turbine |
Closet Turbine |
Page of Noise Assessment Report |
P1191 | 40.6 | 529 m | T75 | Pg.40 of 291 |
P1235 | 41.3 | 451m | T75 | 40 |
P1562 | 41.5 | 370m | T36 | 40 |
P1610 | 42.7 | 429m | T36 | 40 |
P1666 | 46 | 253m | T65 | 40 |
P1688 | 40.6 | 612m | T01 | 40 |
P1703 | 41.7 | 488m | T65 | 40 |
P1711 | 40.3 | 702m | T01 | 40 |
P1765 | 41.4 | 590m | T76 | 40 |
P1846 | 41 | 629m | T76 | 40 |
P1848 | 41.5 | 427m | T55 | 40 |
P1872 | 41 | 593m | T76 | 40 |
P191 | 43.4 | 336m | T88 | 40 |
P1981 | 40.2 | 671m | T76 | 40 |
P2293 | 40.2 | 573m | T31 | 40 |
P2529 | 40.5 | 446m | T56 | 40 |
P2548 | 40.9 | 632m | T33 | 40 |
P2550 | 40.9 | 693m | T34 | 40 |
P2579 | 43.8 | 380m | T33 | 40 |
P2590 | 45.4 | 280m | T35 | 40 |
P2614 | 41.4 | 693m | T02 | 40 |
P2636 | 40.6 | 506m | T35 | 40 |
P2640 | 41.1 | 510m | T23 | 40 |
P3160 | 40.4 | 564m | T18 | 40 |
P3171 | 40.3 | 574m | T60 | 40 |
P3893 | 41.7 | 425m | T24 | 41 |
P3897 | 42.1 | 398m | T04 | 41 |
P411 | 40.4 | 563m | T51 | 41 |
P439 | 40.3 | 546m | T39 | 41 |
P580 | 40.1 | 537m | T90 | 41 |
P595 | 44.7 | 299m | T94 | 41 |
P689 | 44 | 289m | T07 | 41 |
One thought on “Turbine Collapses when is it too close?”