Category Archives: Shadow Flicker

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

Report Shadow Flicker

turbine silouete
May 27, 2017

For anyone experiencing shadow flicker from turbines, and especially if you have been told erroneously NOT to report it, please read this message to us from the MOECC. We advise everyone to report to the MOECC, and the wind power developer but above all, to always include the MOECC in your reporting. Be sure to get an Incident Report number when you call.

MOECC: Thank you for your inquiry. The Ministry remains committed to reviewing and assessing all complaints related to the operation of a wind facility.

To register a complaint, please contact either the local MOECC district office (during business hours), or the Spills Action Centre (after hours).

Complaints received by the Spills Action Centre will be assessed and forwarded to the appropriate MOECC district office for action.

I thank you again for your inquiry.

Shannon Seko

Senior Manager, Spills Action Centre

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change

5775 Yonge Street, Suite 500
Toronto, ON M2M 4J1

Spills Action Centre -Reports after business hours can be made by calling:

  • 1-800-268-6060 (toll-free, province-wide, 24/7)
  • 416-325-3000 (Toronto area)
  • 1-855-889-5775 (TTY)

Business Hours– Report to your local District Office

Find your local MOECC office 

mnr_offices

 

 

Shadow Flicker

You have to see it to believe it.  You have to see it to understand the intrusive severe nature of trespass for residents whose homes are now adjacent to industrial wind turbines.  You have to see it to gain an idea of the damaging effects of being exposed to strobing shadow flicker in the most private of places your home.

““As it stands, shadow flicker is annoying and annoyance is a serious health issue under the World Health Organization.”

Wind facilities are NOT good neighbours.

Dashwood couple’s problem with shadow flicker raises ire

By Lynda Hillman-Rapley, Postmedia Network

Matt Metzgar’s video has gone viral.

Filmed April 28 and then uploaded, the video of the shadow flicker his parents live with at their RR 1, Dashwood home has been viewed over 44,000 times and has been shared 740 times.

Metzgar filmed and then shared the video to draw attention to the conditions in which his parents have had to endure from a nearby wind turbine. The turbine is placed 667 metres away from their home, but the shadows from the rotating blades reach their home on County Rd. 83 in Huron County.

“Most people admire a beautiful sunset, my parents not so much,” Metzgar says in the video.

The video has drawn comments from around the globe, but more importantly for Metzgar, it’s also drawn the attention of Northland Power, which owns and operates that wind turbine and others. Northland has promised to investigate, and has even offered to provide some blinds for the occupants “until a permanent solution” can be found.

The senior Metzgar have lived with the flicker problem – without complaint – since the turbine became operational in 2016. They didn’t want to be interviewed about the situation.

But their son believes the flicker needs to be corrected. Indeed, he said his parents can’t watch television without their viewing being interfered by the movement of the turbine blades.

“My parents have never been complainers,” Metzgar said. “And they don’t wish to be seen as such. They don’t have any hope that complaining will get them any results. I, however, have heard them mention the shadow flicker numerous times but never experienced it until last month. I was under the impression that the flicker is the same as what I’m experiencing at my home. That flicker lasts for about 45 minutes, and since we are not using the east part of my house in the morning for prolonged times, I just took notice of their complaints and never thought it was this extreme.”

READ REST OF ARTICLE

Plymptom Wyoming, Ontario, Mayor, Council, Issue Groundbreaking New Wind Turbine Noise By Law

turbine noise Canada Free Press,  By Guest Column Sherri Lange  October 18, 2014

Mayor Lonny Napper of Plympton Wyoming, Ontario, with his Chief Administrative Officer, Kyle Pratt, led his council to a “game changer” bylaw last week.  The wind turbine noise bylaw crafted by council and vetted with Toronto lawyer, Eric Gillespie, references Infrasound and Low Frequency Noise (ILFN) and pulsing barometric pressure changes that are now recognized to damage health around the world.

The bylaw references charging fees to developers if ILFN causes residents problems.  Common effects are from chronic unrelenting noise, sleep disorders, hormone level disruption, increased risk of disease, diabetes, hypertension, depression, heart arrhythmias, and possibly even cancer. (Carmen Krogh and Dr Robert McMurtry, both of Ontario,  recently published a case definition that accepts inner ear disruption, sleep disorders, hypertension, mood disorders, nausea, tinnitus, as part of the presenting complaints combined with proximity to wind turbines.)

In  Plympton Wyoming, complaints will lead to investigations and hefty fines. This is the first bylaw directly referencing ILFN and demanding fines of between $500 to $10,000 per day, and which may be, the bylaw states, in excess of $100,000.
While over 80 Ontario municipalities have called for a moratorium, declared themselves unwilling hosts, and have called for the resignation of the Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Arlene King, as well as variously creating new bylaws for longer setbacks and decommissioning costs, the Green Energy and Green Economy Act 2009 (GEA), subjugates most Ontario law under its wings, leaving communities scrambling to find ways to protect themselves.  Mayor Napper and his council have likely found the idea remedy: one that is not subsumed into the GEA.  Health issues cannot be found to be contrary to the GEA or “frustrate” the efforts of the laws to perpetuate wind turbine factories, or so-called “renewable energy platforms.”

“When I took an oath to protect my community, I took it very seriously,” continues Mayor Napper.  “The information about what other communities are suffering, disruption, noise, degradation of precious landscapes, seriously divided communities, and to see that this possible devastation is in my full view, for my residents, something has to give.”

Thank you Mayor Napper and Plymptom Wyoming council. Read the rest of the article here.

Diagnostic criteria for adverse health effects in the environs of wind turbines

Summary:

In an effort to address climate change, governments have pursued policies that seek to reduce greenhouse gases.  alternative energy including wind power, has been proposed by some as the preferred approach.  Few would debate the need to reduce air pollution, but the reduction is important not only for efficiency but also for health protection.  The topic of adverse health effects is the environs of Industrial Wind Turbines (AHE/IWT) has proven to be controversial and can present physicians with challenges regarding the management of an exposure to IWT.  Rural physicians in particular must be aware of the possibility of people presenting to their practices with a variety of sometimes confusing complainants.  An earlier version of the diagnostic criteria for AHE/IWT was published in Aug 2011.  A revised case definition and a model for a study to establish a confirmed diagnosis is proposed. 

[The healthcare practitioner applying the criteria must be licensed to take a medical or health history and to make a diagnosis.  Physicians should consider that children are also affected but in ways sufficiently different from adults}

Read the entire report here:

Diagnostic criteria for adverse health effects in the everons of wind turbines..

Debate Continues Over Wind Energy

CHCH News

Wind is fairly new and controversial in this province with some saying it’s a much needed clean source of energy, while others — many of them in communities around Lake Ontario and Lake Erie — are saying ‘not in my backyard’. Considerations with wind turbines include the environmental mark they make and the environmental benefits they offer, as well as the financial implications.

There are five wind turbines in West Lincoln now but there will be many, many more as soon as they pass environmental approvals. Ontario Power Authority says wind is an important part of its energy portfolio — it’s expanding infrastructure for all the power Ontario produces and the province wants a mix of sources so they balance each other out — especially now that they’ve phased out coal. But in West Lincoln, people say their rural way of life is being destroyed, and there’s nothing they can do to stop it.

The wind turbines in West Lincoln don’t seem to make noise, but Zlata Zoretic has lived in their flickering shadow since they went up a year ago: “Just whomp, whomp all day. It’s terrible.”

The sound is on YouTube. People living near wind turbines complain of headaches, inability to sleep, ear ringing and diminished property values. Nellie Dehaans is terrified of this. For decades, she’s lived on the other side of Smithville: “It’s going to look much different. I’ve got turbines coming that way, that way, that way. West Lincoln’s getting 44, the whole project is 77 plus three extras in case.”

The wind farms are expected to stretch from Smithville to Wainfleet. And the turbines will be much bigger — the size of a 60 storey building.

Wind power can cost almost twice as much per kilowatt hour as gas or nuclear energy. But there’s no power when there’s no wind — like in a muggy summer heat wave.

Wendy Veldman lives next to a turbine: “They produce it when we need it the least. They are not reliable. The wind is blowing today. But, there are some days when they sit still. What are we going to do when that’s happening. But, there always has to be backup power.”

If there is too much wind, the power has to be sold off at a loss, or the companies are paid not to produce. But, we don’t pay when there’s no wind.  Read rest of article here.

Watch local windwarriors being interviewed here. http://www.chch.com/wp-content/plugins/projekktorvm/embed.php?id=15253&poster=http://www.chch.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/2014-0924-WindEnergyEN6.jpg&long=&noad=false#rdzutabx

Sixty Residents fighting for their Quality of Life.

This is a lawsuit to keep an eye on.  It’s being heard in their State Supreme Court.

Sixty residents from Orangeville and Attica have filed lawsuits claiming that the Stony Creek Wind Farm is ruining their quality of life, destroyed property values, and is affecting their health because of noise and vibration.

CaptureAttorney Richard Lippes, who handled the Love Canal lawsuits, is representing the angry residents.

Lippes said the basis of the lawsuit claims the wind turbines were erected too close to residential homes and are now causing “adverse effects.”

The lawsuits were filed in State Supreme Court in Wyoming County and they also seek restrictions on operation of the wind turbines.

The Orangeville wind farm contains 58 wind turbines and was constructed in 2013 by Invenergy – which is the sole defendant in the lawsuits.

Invenergy issued the following statement in response:

About the Orangeville wind farm

As a clean energy leader, Invenergy is committed to successful, enduring partnerships with the communities in which our projects are located. We are grateful for the broad support we’ve received in Western New York and continue to receive from members of the community.

While support for renewable energy is strong across our country, we take seriously any concerns of those who live in a project host community. That is why we took great care in developing the Orangeville wind farm in accordance with all local, state, and federal laws and regulations. The lengthy authorization process was open and inclusive, allowing extensive opportunity for citizen input.

In addition, since the Orangeville wind farm commenced commercial operation, the facility has been operated and maintained in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations, including local zoning laws, relevant state agency directives, and Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) requirements.

About Wind Turbine Sound and Health

Numerous studies – conducted in countries all over the world – have found no evidence to support a link between sound emitted from wind turbines and adverse health effects.

About Wind Turbines and Property Values A 2013 comprehensive report by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory studied wind turbines and home values. In analyzing more than 50,000 home sales near 67 wind farms in nine states, researchers were “unable to uncover any impacts to nearby home property values.”

About Petitioners’ Motions

The Orangeville wind farm will vigorously defend itself against the unfounded claims set forth in these complaints

Follow to watch the accompanying News Report.

Letter to Slovenia re Known Adverse Health Impacts of Wind Turbine Noise

Now please keep in mind as you read this, in Ontario the setback is 550m from homes….and as you know IPC has encroached even on that!!   

Mr Diego Loredan, Chairman,
Ms Katarina Dea Zetko,

Civil Initiative for the Protection of Seno žeška Brda

 

I have been asked by Ms Katarina Dea Zetko to write to you, concerning the proposals to site large industrial wind turbines, 130 metres high, sited as close as 800 metres to homes in rural Slovenia. You are welcome to use this letter to educate others, and to make it publicly available.

In my opinion, based on my first hand knowledge of what has happened to wind turbine neighbours in Australia and elsewhere internationally, this is a recklessly irresponsible and dangerous plan and will inevitably result in serious adverse health effects for citizens of Slovenia who are neighbours of such turbines, out to significant distances. This is happening around the world, and I know of no reason why Slovenian citizens will not have the same adverse health impacts being reported internationally.

Breaches of UN Convention Against Torture

slide_4Decisions made by public officials to approve such an unsafe development, or to allow a development to continue to operate in spite of directly causing adverse health consequences such as sleep deprivation and “sensory bombardment from noise”, could be held to be breaches of the UN Convention Against Torture. Both “sleep deprivation” and “sensory bombardment from noise” have been acknowledged as methods of torture by the Physicians for Human Rights. TheUN  Committee Against Torture has also specifically acknowledged that sleep deprivation is used as a method of torture.

The Committee against Torture (CAT) has noted that sleep deprivation used for prolonged periods constitutes a breach of the CAT, and is primarily used to break down the will of the detainee. Sleep deprivation can cause impaired memory and cognitive functioning, decreased short term memory, speech impairment, hallucinations, psychosis, lowered immunity, headaches, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, stress, anxiety and depression.”

Consequently, behaviour by public officials including specifically elected politicians and public servants in Slovenia, such as approving such a dangerous development, or allowing a wind development to continue to operate, whilst knowing that the turbines are causing adverse health effects from sleep deprivation and sensory bombardment with noise could be held to be a breaches of the UN Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment, which I note Slovenia is a signatory to. Article 2 of the UN Convention Against Torture states:

read more: WAUBRA FOUNDATION, AUG 11 2014

Wind Turbines An Enormous Waste Of Taxpayer Money

meanwhile in Ontario…

A recent Siemens/Mid American Iowa Energy commercial touts Iowans embracing wind turbines as a successful renewable energy alternative to fossil fuels. Having researched wind turbines and wind energy production it is difficult to comprehend why we continue to throw good money at the staggering failure this source of energy has proven to be in its implementation.

An article in National Review Online, by Robert Bryce, reveals the Backlash against big wind continues. When it comes to reporting on the failures of “green” energy alternatives, the main stream media and the environmental eco-terrorists remain suspiciously silent. In a recent consumer complaint against wind turbines, the residents of New York’s Herkimer County have filed a lawsuit in Albany against “the Spanish electric utility Iberdrola, which is the second-largest wind-energy operator in the U.S. The Herkimer County residents — all of whom live within a mile or so of the $200 million Hardscrabble Wind Power Project — are suing Iberdrola and a group of other companies because of the noise and disruption caused by the wind project.”

Reports have been increasing of complaints surrounding the noise caused by wind turbines. Many residents wholeheartedly supported these wind turbines being utilized as an alternative energy source to provide electricity for their homes. The reality, however, has led them to the courts to undo the damage caused by the turbines. In addition to the many complaints of noise and disruption caused by the wind turbines, people are also discovering that the electric service provided by the turbines is not dependable as a constant source of energy. A backup source utilizing coal or fossil fuel is necessary to guarantee dependability of service by the utilities.

People have also begun to realize a substantial loss of property values and inability to sell their homes due to their close proximity to the wind turbines. Reports have also revealed that in some communities people have complained of headaches and seizures caused by the strobing effect of the sun shining through the rotating blades of the turbines at certain times of the day. Many have had to shutter their homes completely to avoid this unsettling and unhealthy effect.

As reported in the Institute for Energy Research in Great Britain wind turbines have proved to be undependable sources of electricity, to the point of absurdity. In the winter, the wind turbines became so cold that they seized up. Generators had to be brought to the turbines to heat them up and keep them turning, although they were not able to provide more energy than it took to run the generators that kept them warm. In the spring, the turbines spun so wildly that the government had to pay the utility to shut them down. There is no viable, cost-effective method to store energy once it is generated.

Energy produced by wind turbines has repeatedly failed to be a reliable source. The Obama Administration, along with the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency must concede that wind power is a massive failure, and remove it from their “all of the above” energy plan.

Right Reason, August 10, 2014