Category Archives: Health effects from wind turbines

Update on Wind Turbine Study

huron county Wind-Turbines

Wednesday, February 21, 2018

Update on Huron County Wind Turbine Study about Noise, Vibration and Light
Recruitment continues for the Huron County Wind Turbine Study about Noise, Vibration, and Light.
Launched in October of 2017, recruitment for participants will continue until the end of October 2018.
Interested Huron County residents, who live within 10 km of a wind turbine, can find all the materials needed to participate in the study at any branch of the Huron County library. Library branches can also return participants’ completed materials to the Health Unit.

Materials are also available on the newly-updated website page, www.huronhealthunit.ca/wind.

Huron County residents who live within 10 km of a wind turbine are eligible to participate.  The Health Unit wants to hear from those who do and do not have difficulties with wind turbines so we can look at differences between the two groups.

Participation involves returning a completed consent form, doing the Registration Survey, and completing the Observation Diary.  We are asking participants to complete the Observation Diary at least one week every month during the 12-month data collection period.  A map showing what households are eligible can be found at any branch of the Huron County Library and on the Huron County Health Unit website.

For more information, please visit huronhealthunit.ca or contact the Huron County Health Unit at 519-482-3416 or 1-877-837-6143.

Wind Turbines & Human Distress

scream-2

In 1987 the US Government published a document outlining a propose metric for assessing wind turbine noise and impacts at a community level.

A Proposed Metric for Assessing the Potential of Community Annoyance from Wind Turbine Low-Frequency Noise Emissions; N.D. Kelley ,November 1987

Robbed of Health

Emmetsburg News| Letter to Editor|December 27th, 2017

Body Reflex affected by Industrial Wind Turbines

Residents, visitors and sensitive passerby, your daily life will be gravely impacted by the proposed 170 to 198 Industrial Wind Turbines 24/7 constant blinking, constant shadow flicker, constant noise, constant vibrations, constant electro-magnetic energy emissions because your body reacts to the overstimulation. You do not choose to react. The miraculous body has an autonomic reflex similar to the knee jerk response. The body PCO2 Respiratory Reflex becomes affected.

The Pre-Construction Analysis provides evidence this specific Palo Alto?County Industrial Wind Project will affect our health. Removing any doubt. Sadly, you will be robbed of health.

The PCO2 Response Reflex in humans means automatically your body processes react to exposure. You have excessive CO2 and the brain and lungs hyper-ventilate. The autonomic nervous system reflex becomes affected leading to brain lesions over time in the brain stem. The adverse evolutionary problem affecting respiratory control has been studied since the 1980’s through brain MRI.

Since 1988, Dr. Mariana Alves-Pereira from Lusofona University, Portugal has been studying and clinically caring for patients who reside in close proximity to Industrial Wind Turbines from around the globe. The same causative link are found in in patients living in Industrial Wind Turbine Projects in Japan, Finland, Spain, New Zealand, Russia, China, Canada, US; wherever.

Unfortunately, wind does not stay on the private property line. Acoustical trespassing of harmful emissions intrudes upon anyone in electro-magnetic energy wave. Concerned citizens, I care about your health, feel free to contact me for more information.

Dr. Alves-Pereira presented these findings to the Minnesota Legislative Energy Commission on?October 19, 2017 and I shared them with the Board of Supervisors prior to their vote on 10/24/2017. Shockingly, none of the Supervisors read the pre-construction evidence presented on this project.

Lois Stillman

Emmetsburg

Huron County wind turbine noise investigation launched

WCO_K_1194_7x5-2
Home in Huron County: Finally, tracking wind turbine noise complaints — the government isn’t doing it [Photo Gary Moon]
November 11, 2017

Here is an excerpt from a report on the recent meeting in Clinton, announcing the launch of the Huron County public health investigation into wind turbine noise.

A few notes: as far as we are aware, the “study” is actually an “investigation” under the Health Protection and Prevention Act of Ontario, in which reports of adverse health effects may be reported and investigated. The only association with the University of Waterloo was the review by the ethics committee of that university — the university is not involved in any other phase of the project.

Wind Concerns Ontario had proposed to carry out Phase II of the study which would involve follow-up measurements in homes identified as problematic by the Health Unit, as part of a research study by a multi-disciplinary team. Although federal government funding was not achieved for that proposal, efforts to fund that initiative are ongoing.

This project is the first of its kind in Ontario; it was initiated based on reports of adverse health effects by residents of Huron County made to their health unit, and is supported by them.

For more information about the Huron County Health Unit project please visit the website here.

Huron County Health Unit launches wind farm study

By John Miner

ONTARIO FARMER November 7, 2017

Huron County’s on-again, off-again study on the health impact of wind farms is moving ahead with warnings from the researchers about what it can’t accomplish.

Even if the results in the end definitely show that wind farms are damaging the health of residents, the county’s health unit will not be able to order the turbines stopped, a public meeting was told.

“We do not have the authority to curtail or shut down wind turbines. If you are thinking of participating in the study in the hope that we will shut down the turbines, we want you to understand we cannot do that,” Dr. Erica Clark, an epidemiologist with the Huron County Health Unit, announced at the start of a public information session attended by about 60 people.

Courts have determined that Ontario health units do not have the legal ability to issue orders to protect public health in cases where the provincial government has given that responsibility to another body, Clark said.

In the case of wind farms, the government has given the power to regulate wind turbines to the Ministry of the Environment, not public health units, she said.

Dr. Maarten Bokhout: “If research indicates there are health issues, that can be raised with the Ontario government”

Dr. Maarten Bokhout, Acting Medical Officer of Health at the Huron County Health Unit, said while he cannot step on the Environment Ministry’s toes and he does not have the power to write orders against wind turbines, the results of the study will be published online, including interim reports.

The health unit’s one-year study, established in collaboration with the University of Waterloo and reviewed by the university’s ethics committee, will look at how people are annoyed by noise, vibration and light [shadow flicker] from wind farms.

The goal is to establish how many people are bothered by wind turbines in the county and determine if environmental conditions that make the noise, vibration light and sensations from wind turbines worse.

The study will rely on residents living within 10 km of a wind turbine who volunteer to keep a diary of their experience within their own home.

Participants are asked to record their observations at least once a week.

The researchers will not be making any actual sound or vibration measurements for the study.

Huron County is home to more than 300 industrial wind turbines and some of the largest wind farms in the province.

Some residents have blamed the turbines for a series of health problems, including headaces, nausea, dizziness and insomnia.

Clark, who is principal investigator on the study, said they want participation from both people who have been bothered by wind turbines and those who haven’t experienced any problems.

The 10-kilometre study zone around wind turbines means thousands of Huron County residents are eligible to sign up for the project, including all of the towns of Goderich and Exeter.

See the print edition of Ontario Farmer for a related story: Rural residents skeptical government would act on wind

Source: http://www.windconcernsontario.ca/huron-county-wind-turbine-noise-investigation-launched/

Wind Turbine Study Recruitment Begins

kincardine

Recruitment is now underway for the new wind turbine study.

This study has been reviewed and received research ethics clearance through a University of Waterloo Research Ethics Committee (ORE 22115). However, the decision to participate is yours.

The Huron County Health Unit Medical Officer of Health will not be writing an order under section 13 of the Health Protection and Promotion Act. A single study will not provide enough evidence to prove causality. Further, the Medical Officer of Health does not have the authority to write an order under section 13 of the Health Protection and Promotion Act to curtail or shut down wind turbines. An Ontario Health Services Appeal and Review Board decision and Ontario Superior Court of Justice judicial review outline the limits on a Medical Officer of Health’s authority to write orders.

You are eligible to participate if you are an English speaking Huron County resident and live within 10 km of a wind turbine. To see if your household is eligible, please view the eligibility map [PDF]. If you are having trouble opening the PDF, please see below.

If you live within five km of a wind turbine you will be mailed an information letter and consent form. If you live 5-10 km from a wind turbine you can still participate by reading the information letter on this website, downloading and printing the consent form, and returning the completed consent form to the Huron County Health Unit by mail or in person. You can also find copies of the information letter, consent form, parent permission form, child assent form, Registration Survey and Observation Diary at any branch of the Huron County Library. A copy of the map showing what areas of the county can participate in the study is also available at all branches of the Huron County Library.

For more information about this study

Brown County Hosts Meeting on Wind Turbine Health Effects

On October 14, 2014 Brown County Board of Health  unanimously approved a motion declaring the Shirley Wind turbines a “Human Health Hazard” . The debate and reports of adverse health effects continues to date.

“To declare the Industrial Wind Turbines at Shirley Wind Project in the Town of Glenmore, Brown County, WI. A Human Health Hazard for all people (residents, workers, visitors, and sensitive passersby) who are exposed to Infrasound/Low Frequency Noise and other emissions potentially harmful to human health.”

A special event was held on September 12, 2017 with 4 speakers who gave presentations about wind turbine health effects:

BCCRWE September 12, 2017  Wisconsin
Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy
Press release

Shirley Wind (Brown County, WI) has received global attention following the October 14, 2014 declaration by the Brown County Board of Health that Duke Energy’s eight 2.5 MW wind turbines are a human health hazard – a declaration that has not been rescinded.

In an ongoing effort to gain further understanding of the issue of wind turbine adverse health effects, a joint meeting of the Brown County Human Services Committee and Board of Health was held on September 12, 2017. Four guest speakers gave presentations, followed by two hours of challenging and constructive questions from county officials (see questions here). The speakers included:

Herb Coussons, MD, Brown County primary care physician who has evaluated six of the numerous adversely affected Shirley Wind residents
Robert W. Rand, ASA, INCE, who has been investigating wind turbine noise with site noise measurements for the last eight years, including at Shirley Wind and Falmouth, MA
Robert J. McCunney, MD, who practices occupational and environmental medicine in Boston, MA
Mark Werner, PhD, from the Wisconsin Division of Public Health

The presentations by Dr. Coussons and Robert Rand focused on the science, on their personal expertise, and on what wind turbine residents have taught us about adverse health effects resulting from wind turbine emissions. Their goal is to protect public health, including the health of residents at Shirley Wind, by sharing with county officials why they have concluded that industrial wind turbines sited in proximity to human populations can cause adverse health effects.

Neither Dr. Coussons nor Robert Rand received any compensation for speaking at this meeting, whereas, when pressed, Dr. McCunney admitted on stage that he was paid by Duke Energy (owner of Shirley Wind) to speak at this meeting. Dr. McCunney has also co-authored literature reviews in 2009 and 2014 that were each funded by the American Wind Energy Association and/or the Canadian Wind Energy Association. He has also testified on behalf of wind interests in numerous court cases or wind project permitting proceedings in the US and other countries.

The central focus of Dr. McCunney’s presentation was the Health Canada study, which he knows, or should have known, cannot be applied to Shirley Wind. Health Canada and its lead researcher, Dr. David Michaud, have made it clear in public papers and statements that:

•“… results may not be generalized to areas beyond the sample as the wind turbine locations in this study were not randomly selected”
•“… this design does not permit any conclusions to be made with respect to causality.”
•“… the results will not provide a definitive answer on their own.”

Dr. McCunney did not disclose these limitations in his presentation, potentially leaving the impression that the Health Canada study is applicable to Shirley Wind, which it is not.

In summary, the meeting demonstrated that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that wind turbines pose public health risks, and that it is time for Wisconsin and Brown County health authorities to formally acknowledge this, so that the discussion will move forward to correct the harm that wind turbines have caused.

Watch it at: https://youtu.be/8bpc-pYMu48 … and don’t miss the critically important Q & A session, paying special attention to each question asked and how, or if, it is answered.

A repository of additional information related to this meeting will be developed over time and can be accessed at: http://bccrwe.com/27

Noise from wind turbines may cancel a Sale

good neigboursParis – The noise of new wind turbines may justify the cancellation of the purchase of a house if the buyer claims it.

The purchaser, faced with this nuisance, may in fact invoke his own misjudgment which has vitiated his consent, especially if he has been preoccupied with the environment before buying, judges the Court of Cassation.

Although no one is at fault, the error of one of the parties leads to a defect in his consent which justifies the handing over of things to their former state, that is to say the reciprocal restitution of the house and its price, Admit the judges.

Since the construction of wind turbines is not a question of town planning, it may not be reported as such to the future purchaser, To inform the city council on urbanism projects, observes the judges.

This future purchaser can not therefore complain that it has not been reported to him. It would have been necessary to ask precisely the question of a project of installation of wind turbines. But in any case, even informed of the project, the seller could make a mistake as to the significance of its consequences.

In short, the seller, purchaser, notary and administrations are excusable because, knowing the project, nobody could imagine the magnitude of the nuisance. It was only when they appeared that the purchaser could see that if he had known, he would not have bought. 

(Cass Civ 3, 29.6.2017, Z 16-19.337)

This future purchaser can not therefore complain that it has not been reported to him. It would have been necessary to ask precisely the question of a project of installation of wind turbines. But in any case, even informed of the project, the seller could make a mistake as to the significance of its consequences. In short, the seller, purchaser, notary and administrations are excusable because, knowing the project, nobody could imagine the magnitude of the nuisances. It was only when they appeared that the purchaser could see that if he had known, he would not have bought. (Cass Civ 3, 29.6.2017, Z 16-19.337). (© AFP / 07 July 2017 09h55)

Installation of wind turbines. But in any case, even informed of the project, the seller could make a mistake as to the significance of its consequences. In short, the seller, purchaser, notary and administrations are excusable because, knowing the project, nobody could imagine the magnitude of the nuisances. It was only when they appeared that the purchaser could see that if he had known, he would not have bought. (Cass Civ 3, 29.6.2017, Z 16-19.337). (© AFP / 07 July 2017 09h55)

While knowing the project, no one could imagine the extent of the nuisances. It was only when they appeared that the purchaser could see that if he had known, he would not have bought. (Cass Civ 3, 29.6.2017, Z 16-19.337). (© AFP / 07 July 2017 09h55)

Google translate Original text in French:

Link to Court Decision

Le bruit des éoliennes peut annuler une vente  

french wind project
Installation of wind turbines in France

Noise as a Public Health Problem

icben

Sound emitted by wind turbines has been dogged by ongoing world wide reports of associated adverse health resulting from exposure due to industrial wind turbine acoustic emissions. Health effects that can be severe enough people are forced to abandoned their homes. Seeking relief, respite and to protect their health from further negative impacts due to exposure to noise pollution.  The 12th International Commission on Biological Effects of Noise Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem was held in Zurich on 18–22 of June 2017.  The proceeding received multiple papers on the subject of wind turbine noise and health.

The following shares some of the papers presented.

12th ICBEN Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem

Selected papers from the 12th International Commission on Biological Effects of Noise Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem, Zurich, 18–22 June 2017:

Recent progress in the field of non-auditory health effects of noise – trends and research needsby Yvonne de Kluizenaar and Toshihito Matsui – The Netherlands and Japan
… A wealth of new research on non-auditory health effects of noise has been published over the last 3 years. …

Health Effects of Low Frequency Noise and Infrasound from Wind Farms: Results from an Independent Collective Expertise in Franceby Philippe Lepoutre, Paul Avan, Anthony Cadene, David Ecotière, Anne-Sophie Evrard, Frédérique Moati, and Esko Topilla – France
… Recent results on the physiology of cochleo-vestibular system have revealed several pathways of physiological effects mechanisms that could be activated in response to exposure to ILFN. This sensory system has a particular sensitivity to these frequencies, superior to that of other parts of the human body. Available data suggest the hypothesis that sounds of frequencies too low or levels too low to be clearly audible could have effects mediated by receptors of the cochleo-vestibular system. …

Noise Annoyance Caused by Large Wind Turbines – A Dose-Response Relationshipby Valtteri Hongisto and David Oliva – Finland
The purpose was to determine a dose-response-relationship of large wind turbines with nominal power of 3-5 MW. A cross-sectional survey was conducted around three wind power areas in Finland. The sample involved all households within 2km from the nearest turbine. Altogether 400 households out of 753 reported the annoyance indoors. The dose-response relationship was determined between the predicted noise exposure, LAeq, outdoors and the percentage of highly annoyed by wind turbine noise indoors. The percentage of highly annoyed, %HA, was less than 3%, and relatively even below 40dB LAeq. %HA started to increase when the level exceeded 40dB. …

Hearing Beyond the Limit: Measurement, Perception and Impact of Infrasound and Ultrasonic Noiseby Christian Koch – Germany
In our daily lives, many sources emit infrasound due to their functions or as a side effect. At the other end of the hearing frequency range, airborne ultrasound is applied in many technical and medical processes and has also increasingly moved into everyday life. There are numerous indicators that sound at these frequencies can be perceived and can influence human beings. However, the precise mechanisms of this perception are unknown at present and this lack of understanding is reflected by the unsatisfactory status of the existing regulations and standards. …

A Review of the Human Exposure-Response to Amplitude-Modulated Wind Turbine Noise: Health Effects, Influences on Community Annoyance, Methods of Control and Mitigationby Michael J. B. Lotinga, Richard A. Perkins, Bernard Berry, Colin J. Grimwood, and Stephen A. Stansfeld – U.K.
… The conclusions of most reviews of the research on the effects of WTN on health, including those carried out on behalf of Government agencies, confirm that annoyance is caused by WTN, and that AM appears to increase annoyance. The association of WTN with sleep disturbance appears to be considerably more complex. … All of the field studies outlined so far have focussed on the responses to time-averaged WTN exposure levels. In a study of noise emissions from 1.8 MW turbines, it was argued that noise annoyance expressed by residents at 500-1900m distances might be exacerbated by AM, increased levels and low-frequency content occurring in the late evening and night-time. These phenomena were attributed to the stable night-time atmosphere causing high wind shear, and the coincidence of AM patterns from the turbines. … On the basis of the review and studies considered above, a control for AM has been proposed for use in planning windfarm developments. This control takes as its basis the principle that AM increases annoyance caused by WTN, and that this increase can be characterised by adding a penalty value to the overall WTN level, to equalise it with subjective judgement of a negligible-AM WTN sound. The results of ref 58 suggest that fluctuation in broadband WTN-like sounds will almost certainly be sensed by most people with normal hearing at approximately 3dB ΔLAeq,100ms(BP) which forms the proposed onset for the penalty. … The possible influence of increased low-frequency content in the AM is addressed by the design of the metric used to rate the magnitude, which employs frequency filtering to ensure the signal is evaluated for the range that produces the maximum AM rating. …

Review of Research on the Effects of Noise on Sleep Over the Last 3 Yearsby Sarah McGuire and Gunn Marit Aasvang – U.S. and Norway
… Among
the new actigraphy and polysomnographic field studies are the first studies on wind turbine noise which have used objective measures of sleep, as well as a study examining the potential benefit of nighttime air-traffic curfews. Also there have been new epidemiological studies which have added to the knowledge on the effects of noise on self-reported sleep disturbance. …

The Inadequacy of the A-Frequency Weighting for the Assessment of Adverse Effects on Human Populationsby Bruce Rapley, Mariana Alves-Pereira, and Huub Bakker – New Zealand and Portugal

Case Report: Cross-Sensitisation to Infrasound and Low Frequency Noiseby Bruce Rapley, Huub Bakker, Mariana Alves-Pereira, and Rachel Summers – New Zealand
This Case Report describes an episode experienced by two noise-sensitised individuals during a field trip. Exposed to residential infrasound and low frequency noise due coal mining activities, the subjects reacted suddenly, strongly and unexpectedly to pressure pulses generated by a wind farm located at a different town, approximately 160km by road from their residence. Simultaneous physiological data obtained in one subject and subjective sensations occurring during the episode are reported. Acoustical evaluations of the location of the episode are also reported. The possibility of a nocebo effect as an etiological factor for their bodily reactions is cogently eliminated. …

Evaluation of Wind Turbine Noise in Japanby Akira Shimada and Mimi Nameki – Japan
In order to tackle with wind turbine noise (WTN) related complaints, Ministry of the Environment of Japan (MOEJ) set up an expert committee in 2013. In November 2016, the committee published a report on investigation, prediction and evaluation methods of WTN. The report compiles recent scientific findings on WTN, including the results of nationwide field measurements in Japan and the results of review of the scientific literature related to health effects of WTN. The report sets out methodology for investigation, prediction and evaluation as well as case examples of countermeasures. A noise guideline for wind turbine, which suggests WTN should not be more than 5dB above the residual noise where residual noise levels are above 35-40dB, is also presented in the report. MOEJ is developing a WTN noise guideline and a technical manual for WTN investigation based on the report. Both documents will be finalized in the fast half of 2017.

Wind Turbine Noise Effects on Sleep: The WiTNES Studyby Michael Smith, Mikael Ögren, Pontus Thorsson, Laith Hussain-Alkhateeb, Eja Pedersen, Jens Forssén, Julia Ageborg Morsing, and Kerstin Persson Waye – Sweden
Onshore wind turbines are becoming increasingly widespread globally, with the associated net effect that a greater number of people will be exposed to wind turbine noise (WTN). Sleep disturbance by WTN has been suggested to be of particular importance with regards to a potential impact on human health. … Almost all measures of self-reported sleep were negatively impacted following nights with wind turbine noise. The WTN nights lead to increased sleep disturbance, reduced sleep quality, increased tiredness, increased irritation, awakenings, increased difficulty to sleep, sleeping worse than usual, and decreased mood. Subjects dwelling close to wind turbines, and consequently potentially exposed to WTN at home, repeatedly scored their sleep and restoration lower than the reference group following the WTN nights.

Frequency Weighting for the Evaluation of Human Response to Low-Frequency Noise Based on the Physiological Evidence of the Vestibular Systemby Junta Tagusari, Shou Satou, and Toshihito Matsui – Japan
Several studies were found regarding adverse health effects due to low-frequency noise emitted by industrial machines including wind turbines. However, the causal chain between low-frequency noise and health effects still remains unclear. Meanwhile, from the physiological viewpoint, low-frequency noise stimulate hair cells in the vestibular system, which could cause dizziness, vertigo, headache and nausea. The stimulating process is different from the hearing process in the cochlea, which implies that the A-weighting is not appropriate for evaluating the risk of low-frequency noise and that an alternative method is required. …

 

Source: National Wind Watch

child & noise

 

Falmouth Ordered to shut down Turbines

falmouth wind turbine clock is ticking

By Ethan Genter  Cape Cod Times

Posted Jun 20, 2017 at 9:09 PM
Updated Jun 20, 2017 at 9:34 PM

BARNSTABLE — A Barnstable Superior Court judge on Tuesday ordered the town of Falmouth to shut down two town-owned wind turbines.

Judge Cornelius Moriarty issued his decision at about 4:30 p.m. in the case which pitted the town against its own Zoning Board of Appeals and a neighbor of the turbines. The Board of Selectmen had appealed a decision by the zoning board that found the turbines are a nuisance.

In an emergency meeting Tuesday night, selectmen instructed the town manager to comply with Moriarty’s order.

“We are going to abide by what the judge has ordered,” said Doug Jones, chairman of the Board of Selectmen.

Known as Wind 1 and Wind 2, the two turbines at the Falmouth Wastewater Treatment Facility have been subjected to a litany of lawsuits, with neighbors saying the turbines have negatively affected their health and enjoyment of their properties.

Moriarty’s decision was welcomed by Barry Funfar, who lives next to one of the turbines and has sunk more than $100,000 into fighting their operation.

“We’ve been waiting for this decision for six months,” Funfar said.

The last action in the case was in December.

“My wife and I have been taxed by these turbines, right out of our home. … I’m very, very happy,” Funfar said.

Wind 1 has already been shut down under a prior court ruling, and Wind 2 had been reduced to 12-hour operation cycles.

In their emergency meeting Tuesday, the selectmen only touched on what to do as of 7 a.m. Wednesday morning, when Wind 2 is scheduled to go back online for its next 12-hour cycle.

Jones declined to comment on what the town plans to do after losing its appeal.

“The Town is evaluating the decision with its attorneys,” according to a statement issued by Town Manager Julian Suso.

The selectmen are scheduled to meet again on Monday in executive session to further discuss the judge’s decision, which contradicts another court decision.

In April, a Barnstable Superior Court jury sided with the town, saying there was no nuisance at a Wind 1 neighbor’s property.

There are several other lawsuits working their way through the courts, and while he looks forward to seeing what the selectmen decide, Funfar said he sees Tuesday decision as a “happy bump” in what will likely remain a long road ahead.

“My wife is going to be so happy to hear this,” he said.

 

falmouth_vermont-1473171761-2525