GoodBye to Peace & Quiet

quiet

“When I first came inside, it almost sounded louder inside than outside.” Yes, it does. It’s like living inside a drum.

I sat in my living room reading this article last night with painfully throbbing ears and a headache, due to turbine noise that penetrates through the walls of my house. The noise kept me awake until 3 a.m. I had to write a reply to the tripe that was published in the OBSERVER (Feb. 19).

I bought my home to reside, because of its semi-secluded, quiet and peaceful nature. There is a river across the road from me and wooded area that surrounds me. I enjoyed listening to the river and birds, which is about all I ever heard, until a wind farm was erected around my property. There is a never-ending, jet-like sound that rips through my property and house. There is nothing natural about the noise that comes from these turbines and they are loud! The peaceful existence I once enjoyed here has been stolen from me!

EDP Renewables and the town of Chateaugay’s Jericho Rise Wind Farm was planted too close to my house. There are four 482-foot turbines approximately 1,800 to 2,600 feet from my home. The industry standard for turbine “setbacks” from residences are ridiculously too close.

Much of the time, sound levels at the west and south side of my home is above the allowable 50 dBA which the town of Chateaugay has deemed to be acceptable and legal. The lower frequency dBC levels for sound, or infrasound, are not even taken into account. According to acoustic engineering experts, dBC sound levels have a much higher pressure rating than dBA readings. This noise is detrimental to human health and is well documented throughout the world. I am living proof. The noise inside and outside of my home is a completely menacing nuisance.

I am not a “naysayer.” I am living with these behemoths that surround my property. In fact, I have been living with wind turbines from an older wind farm approximately 3-4 miles from me for the past 6 1/2 years. About 7 months out of the year, due to leafless trees, I can see 15 of them from my front porch. They really don’t bother me. I can’t say I like them, but I can’t hear them either.

I was never an opponent of wind power. I am a science teacher of 11 years and teach about sound and alternative energies. It is in the state curriculum. I even went to an all day wind power teacher’s workshop to get a better understanding of wind energy eight years ago. The wind industry has been setting us up for a fall a long time ago.

By the way, standing directly underneath a turbine is the quietest place to listen to them. Stand back 500, 1000, 1500 feet and downwind from them, and if you still think they are not loud, then you must be deaf. If anyone would like to come to my home in Chateaugay to get a true experience of what these monsters sound like, you are welcome to visit. A town councilman from a neighboring town was here yesterday and he said, “When I first came inside, it almost sounded louder inside than outside.” Yes, it does. It’s like living inside a drum.

As far as a tax base for your community is concerned, there will be none. They will not pay any business property tax whatsoever. The wind farm company will cram a Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) Program down your throat. The county, town and possibly school district will receive a pittance compared to what the wind developer receives in government subsidies. This is how they can afford to build these wind farms.

The absurdity of saying that birds will just fly around the towers is also ridiculous. Birds of prey are looking down to the ground for food, not what’s in front of them. Migratory birds are flying in excess of 40 miles per hour. They do not have the ability to just stop in mid-air and fly around.

Putting “hope and trust” in the wind company is dangerous. I have made many complaints to EDP Renewables and Chateaugay about the nuisance noise. They have been to my house once to take a sound test. It was taken on a day with 2-3 mph wind speeds, and in between my house and garage which blocks all of the south wind. The town engineer said the reading was 38.5 dBA.

Folks, it is not a far stretch from 38.5 dBA to over 50 dBA when the winds are from the west or south in excess of 12 miles per hour. I know, because I have been taking my own sound level readings since Jan. 1. The town and EDP Renewables said they would be taking multiple tests. Two days later, with no notice, town board members popped into my backyard at 9:30 a.m. with a sound meter. I wondered what they were doing here, because it was a legal holiday and again, practically no wind. They acted as though they didn’t realize I was home. They didn’t even knock on my door.

They stated they would be back. Just before they left, one town board member stated, “We wouldn’t want these in our backyard either.” I called the town supervisor later in the day and asked to be notified 24 hours in advance and that I want to be present when these tests were done. They have not been back since. It has been almost two months. I have been lied to and ignored.

During this time, I was introduced to a well credentialed acoustic engineer through a friend. He sent me data on what a proper sound test should include. I have continued to call the EDP Renewable complaint hotline. They were supposed to take more tests last week. I sent EDP Renewables operations manager, town engineer and town supervisor data from the acoustic engineer about what I would be expecting for a proper sound test. I am being ignored once again. So, if anyone thinks that the process of developing a wind farm (before, during or after) is honest and trustworthy, you really should be talking to people that are living in the middle of a wind farm.

Please, do not be fooled by any wind farm company! Also, if you are a non-participating landowner, do not sign their “Neighbor Agreement.” You will lose all your rights (on, under, over, around, etc.) as a property owner. If you have any of the problems I am experiencing right now, you will lose the ability to do or say anything to anyone about it. It is a “gag order” for a very small annual payment.

In closing, I need to say that I gain nothing by writing this. It is only to help those that may be in danger of having to live with a wind farm near their home.

Kevin Sigourney is a resident of Chateaugay, which is located in Franklin County in northern New York near Massena.

Published in Observer March 12, 2017:  http://www.observertoday.com/opinion/commentary/2017/03/once-turbines-arrive-say-goodbye-to-peace-quiet/

Noise Measurement, Assessment & Control for Wind Facilities

111882606XWind Farm Noise: Measurement, Assessment and Control

Colin H Hansen, University of Adelaide, Australia

Con J Doolan, University of New South Wales, Australia

Kristy L Hansen, Flinders University, Australia

A comprehensive guide to wind farm noise prediction, measurement, assessment, control and effects on people

Wind Farm Noise covers all aspects associated with the generation, measurement, propagation, regulation and adverse health effects of noise produced by large horizontal-axis wind turbines of the type used in wind farms.

The book begins with a brief history of wind turbine development and the regulation of their noise at sensitive receivers. Also included is an introductory chapter on the fundamentals of acoustics relevant to wind turbine noise so that readers are well prepared for understanding later chapters on noise measurements, noise generation mechanisms, noise propagation modelling and the assessment of the noise at surrounding residences

Key features:

  • Potential adverse health effects of wind farm noise are discussed in an objective way.
  • Means for calculating the noise at residences due to a wind farm prior to construction are covered in detail along with uncertainty estimates.
  • The effects of meteorological conditions and other influences, such as obstacles, ground cover and atmospheric absorption, on noise levels at residences are explained.
  • Quantities that should be measured as well as how to best measure them in order to properly characterise wind farm noise are discussed in detail.
  • Noise generation mechanisms and possible means for their control are discussed as well as aspects of wind farm noise that still require further research to be properly understood.

The book provides comprehensive coverage of the topic, containing both introductory and advanced level material.

ORDER YOUR COPY:  http://ca.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-111882606X.html 

Noise emitting devices taken down after complaints

Noise-emitting devices installed in a downtown parkette in Toronto were removed following complaints. Begging the question:  WHY NOT REMOVE WIND TURBINES?

Toronto Parkette

Noise is unwanted sound.

Where you live (urban vs. rural) and the  noise emitting source of your acoustical tormentor creates a dichotomy in accessing protections to safe guard personal well- being. Particularly if the noise happens to be from a wind turbine generator.

Noise used to discourage vagrancy and repeal youth from loitering is shut off due to complaints. An urban example with a different outcome than 1 000s upon 1 000s of  turbine complaints  arising in rural areas. Turbine noise is adversely  impairing sleep and creating increasing numbers of families driven out of their homes.  Noise from turbines is allowed secure in the knowledge it is shielded by laws enacted to further the day’s energy policies.  The wind industry hides behind the skirts of its protectors deflecting any compelled action using legalese as a shield and regulations of the Green Energy Act as its sword. Silencing the voices of the hurting and harmed.

READ ARTICLE: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/03/09/city-investigates-noise-emitting-devices-installed-near-downtown-parkette.html

Noise Device identified as The Mosquito: http://www.movingsoundtech.com/

Behind the scenes at Premier Wynne’s news conference

wind-blown

Parker Gallant Energy Perspectives

March 8, 2017

While the Premier was promising relief for Ontario electricity customers (and blaming lots of other people), more proof of the government’s mistakes was occurring …

The press conference and press release on March 2nd for Premier Wynne’s announcement on reducing electricity bills by 25% took a full hour — she and Energy Minister Glenn Thibeault hung around to answer questions from the media.

The speech and the press release were a mea culpa — she apparently hadn’t noticed rates had climbed and referred to those high rates as the “elephant in the room.” She laid the blame on all previous governments in her answers to questions, for example:

Decades of under-investment in the electricity system by governments of all stripes resulted in the need to invest more than $50 billion in generation, transmission and distribution assets to ensure the system is clean and reliable.

The decision to eliminate Ontario’s use of coal and produce clean, renewable power, as well as policies put in place to provide targeted support to rural and low-income customers, have created additional costs.

If the premier was genuinely interested in the cause for high electricity bills she could have looked no farther back than her immediate predecessor, Dalton McGuinty. Premier McGuinty brought Ontario the Green Energy Act and the misinformed, unfounded belief that getting power from industrial wind turbines and solar panels, while paying at price multiples of other available reliable power, would work!

Those wind turbines and solar panels were generating power out of phase with Ontario demand even during her news conference, for which ratepayers are paying as much as 80.2 cents a kilowatt hour (kWh).

During the news conference hour, Ontario ratepayers consumed 17,300 megawatt hours (MWh); 85% of that consumption was provided by nuclear (10,000 MWh) and hydro (4,900 MWh). The balance came from gas, wind, solar and biomass. The average generation cost of nuclear and hydro generation was about $59/MWh (5.9 cents/kWh) and $191/MWh (19.1 cents/kWh) for the 15% provided by gas, wind, solar and biomass. The former costs include the “water tax” on hydro generation and the “decommissioning and fuel disposal” costs of nuclear whereas the latter does NOT include the cost of curtailed wind, idling costs of gas plants or the costs of moving those two gas plants from Oakville and Mississauga to save Liberal seats during the McGuinty era!

Also during that hour, Ontario exported 1,075 MWh to Michigan and 1,203 MWh to New York. Those 2,078 MWh (20% of Ontario’s demand) were sold to our neighbours at an average of $11.38/MWh (1.14 cents/kWh). The exports cost about $202,000, under the contract terms, yet resulted in just $23,000 of revenue to offset that cost. Ontario ratepayers picked up the loss of $179,000.

In fact, for that whole day, “net exports” hit Ontario’s ratepayers with a cost of $2.4 million.

Admitting she made a “mistake” while blaming decades of previous “governments of all stripes” is not a solution. And the 25% reduction in bills isn’t real, either: Premier Wynne is kicking the can down the road and laying the burden of her mistake on taxpayers. She still doesn’t appear to have the political courage to admit she, Mr. McGuinty and their governments made a mistake believing the environmental non-government organizations who persuaded them to believe in a green dream that has now, negatively affected all ratepayers in the province, driving away jobs in the private sector.

The herd of elephants is still in the room. Premier Wynne should start clearing them out by cancelling all wind and solar contracts that have not put a shovel in the ground!

Source: Behind the scenes at Premier Wynne’s news conference

CANCEL WIND AND SOLAR CONTRACTS!!!

Industrial Wind Turbines Can Harm Humans

Carmen KroghTALK ANNOUNCEMENT

TITLE:   Industrial Wind Turbines Can Harm Humans
PRESENTER:  Carmen M Krogh

DATE:  Wednesday, March 29, 2017. 10:00am.
LOCATION:  DC 1302 (Davis Center), University of Waterloo

ABSTRACT:
The topic of the risk of harm to human health associated with wind energy facilities is controversial and debated worldwide. On May 7, 2014, Carmen Krogh presented a seminar at the University of Waterloo which considered some of the research dating back to the early 1980’s. A snapshot of some of the current research available in 2014 was provided. The research is challenged in part by the complexities and numerous variables and knowledge gaps associated with this subject. This presentation will explore some of these research challenges and provide an update on the growing body of evidence regarding human health risk factors. Included will be the emerging research indicating risks to those working in this field.

BIO:
Carmen M Krogh is a full time volunteer and published researcher regarding health effects and industrial wind energy facilities and shares information with communities; individuals; federal, provincial and public health authorities, wind energy developers; the industry; and others. She is an author and a co-author of peer reviewed articles and conference papers presented at wind turbine scientific noise conferences. Ms Krogh is a retired pharmacist whose career includes: senior executive positions at a teaching hospital (Director of Pharmacy); a drug information researcher at another teaching hospital; a Director of a professional organization; and a Director (A) at Health Canada (PMRA). She is the former Director of Publications and Editor in Chief of the Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties (CPS), the book used by physicians, nurses, and health professionals for prescribing information in Canada.

There will time available for questions and discussion.

Deniers in Wind Industry

hear-no-evil

The human health consequences of manipulated measurements

Science deniers in the wind industry

By: Helen Schwiesow Parker, PhD, LCP

Like the tobacco industry before it, the wind industry has spent decades vehemently denying known harmful consequences associated with its product, while promoting its fraudulent feel-good image. Dismissing or denying the serious health impacts of industrial-scale wind turbines is wishful thinking, akin to insisting that tobacco is harmless because we enjoy it.

The problem with wind energy is not just its costly, subsidized, unreliable electricity; the need to back up every megawatt with redundant fossil-fuel power; or its impacts on wildlife and their habitats.

Infrasound (inaudible) and low-frequency (audible) noise (slowly vibrating sound waves collectively referred to as ILFN) produced by Industrial-scale Wind Turbines (IWTs) directly and predictably cause adverse human health effects.  The sonic radiation tends to be amplified within structures, and sensitivity to the impact of the resonance increases with continuing exposure.

These facts have been known to the wind industry and the US government since the 1980s when it became a ‘hot topic,’ with numerous studies presented and published by acousticians working under grants from the Departments of Energy, Defense and NASA. The wind industry response?

Deny the science.  Insist that “what you can’t hear can’t hurt you.” Claim that “neighbors will get used to it.” Measure only outside dwellings, and allow only noise measurements in the field that reflect the relative loudness perceived by the human ear, while drastically reducing sound-level readings in the lower frequencies that are known to cause problems……….

Read More: http://canadafreepress.com/article/science-deniers-in-the-wind-industry

 

Bat remedy hearing concludes

brown-bat

Simcoe-Grey MPP Jim Wilson demands to know why wind power developers get a remedy hearing on endangered bats when harm has been proven. Minister Murray replied he would have to resign if he intervenes in the independence of the Environmental Tribunal process but it is the Green Energy Act that allows wind projects to be approved. Under the Green Energy Act the Minister has authority to intervene.  The Minister to resign over the harm caused by wind projects?  What an interesting idea!

Wednesday, March 1, 2017

Turbine Hearing Concludes

Collingwood | by Catherine Thompson  

yet more submissions in long-running case

A hearing to do with a wind turbine proposal near Stayner took one day instead of three.

The Environmental Review Tribunal allowed WPD Canada to have a Remedy Hearing to present ways to reduce harm to natural heritage, mainly the Little Brown Bat.

The hearing, held in Collingwood council chambers, was originally to start on Monday, but that day was cancelled because a witness was unavailable. The hearing, on Tuesday, heard from three witnesses.

Dr. Scott Reynolds, presenting for WPD Canada, via Skype, says they would slow down the turbine speed when bats are in the air in an effort to decrease the number of bat deaths.

The second witness, Susan Holroyd, a wildlife biologist specializing in bats, appeared by Skype, on the appellant, Preserve Clearview’s side.

The third and last witness was Ecologist Sarah Mainguy, also for the opponent’s side. She told the hearing there are huge uncertainties in this application such as the number of bats and their exact route in the areas of the turbines. She added that the mitigation suggestions from WPD Canada are not good enough.

Witnesses and lawyers could not comment on the hearing proceedings, but Chuck Magwood of Preserve Clearview, was in the audience.  He says he agrees with their witnesses that one dead Little Brown Bat, which is an endangered species, is too many.

WPD has until March 31st to make written submissions, the opponents have four weeks to reply and then another two weeks for WPD to rebut the reply, taking the latest round in the turbine discussions to May 12th.

Magwood says he expects a decision by the Environmental Review Tribunal in June.

READ AT: http://www.bayshorebroadcasting.ca/news_item.php?NewsID=91434

 

Remedy Hearing – Little Brown Bats take centre stage

brown-batWE THOUGHT IT WAS OVER! TURBINE FIGHT STILL GOING! REMEDY HEARING FEB. 28TH!

Wind project developer  (WPD) have been granted another chance that could allow them to install wind turbines at Clearview.  They lost at the Tribunal on the grounds the project would cause serious harm to human health due to the wind turbines interfering and creating risks for safe aviation movements at the adjacent Collingwood airport.  Serious harm to bats was proven.  collingwood_airport_12

ON TUESDAY, FEB. 28. LITTLE BROWN BATS ARE CENTRE STAGE!

A REMEDY HEARING has been granted to allow WPD to present their mitigations measures which need to prove that the mortalities caused by the wind turbines will not cause irreversible  harm to the critically endangered bat population which is facing possible extinction.

Hearing
(28-Feb-17, 10:30 AM)
Hearing
(01-Mar-17, 10:00 AM)

WHERE? Council Chambers, Collingwood, Town Of Collingwood, P.O. Box 157, 97 Hurontario Street, Collingwood, ON

To confirm dates and times look up case number 16-036 under hearings section on the Environmental Review Tribunal website: http://elto.gov.on.ca/ert/hearings/

[220] The Tribunal finds that over the lifespan the Project, it is more likely than not that the Project will cause serious harm to the local population of little brown myotis from which it will not recover and cannot be reversed. Therefore, without additional mitigation measures in place, the Tribunal finds that engaging in the Project in accordance with the REA will cause irreversible harm to little brown myotis.

16-036 WIGGINS V. ONTARIO(MOECC): http://elto.gov.on.ca/ert/hearings/

DECISION:

Wind Power is an attack on Rural America

farm-and-turbinesBy: Robert Byrce  February 27, 2017

Urban voters may like the idea of using more wind and solar energy, but the push for large-scale renewables is creating land-use conflicts in rural regions from Maryland to California and Ontario to Loch Ness.

Since 2015, more than 120 government entities in about two dozen states have moved to reject or restrict the land-devouring, subsidy-fueled sprawl of the wind industry.

The backlash continued last month when a judge in Maryland ruled that the possible benefits of a proposed 17-turbine project did “not justify or offset subjecting the local community to the adverse impacts that will result from the wind project’s construction and operation.” The judge’s ruling probably spells the end of an eight-year battle that pitted local homeowners and Allegany County against the developer of the 60-megawatt project.

Objections to the encroachment of wind energy installations don’t fit the environmentalists’ narrative. The backlash undermines the claim – often repeated by climate activists such as 350.org founder Bill McKibben and Stanford engineering professor Mark Jacobson – that we can run our entire economy on nothing but energy from the wind and sun. Many of those same activists routinely demonize natural gas and hydraulic fracturing even though the physical footprint of gas production is far smaller than that of wind. Three years ago, the late David J.C. MacKay, then a professor at the University of Cambridge, calculated that wind energy requires about 700 times more land to produce the same amount of energy as a fracking site.

house-and-turbines-1
Rural residents are objecting to wind projects to protect their property values and viewsheds. They don’t want to live next door to industrial-scale wind farms. They don’t want to see the red-blinking lights atop the turbines, all night, every night for the rest of their lives. Nor do they want to be subjected to the audible and inaudible noise the turbines produce.

Even in California, which has mandated that 50% of the electricity sold in the state be produced from renewable energy sources by 2030, there is resistance to wind power. In 2015, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to ban wind turbines in L.A.’s unincorporated areas. At the hearing on the measure, then-Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich said the skyscraper-sized turbines “create visual blight … [and] contradict the county’s rural dark skies ordinance.”

In New York, angry fishermen are suing to stop an offshore wind project that could be built in the heart of one of the best squid fisheries on the Eastern Seaboard. Three upstate counties – Erie, Orleans and Niagara – as well as the towns of Yates and Somerset, are fighting a proposed 200-megawatt project that aims to put dozens of turbines on the shores of Lake Ontario. As in California, New York has a “50 by 30” renewable-energy mandate.

Outside the U.S., about 90 towns in Ontario have declared themselves “unwilling hosts” to wind projects.In April 2016, a wind project near Scotland’s famous Loch Ness was rejected by local authorities because of its potential negative effect on tourism. Poland and the German state of Bavaria have effectively banned wind turbines by implementing a rule that allows turbines to be located no closer than 10 times their height to homes or other sensitive areas.

The defeat of the Maryland wind project came as a relief to K. Darlene Park, a resident of Frostburg and the president of Allegany Neighbors & Citizens for Home Owners Rights. “We were up against an army of suits,” she told me. “It’s like a brick has been taken off our shoulders.”Park’s tiny group relied on volunteers and a budget of about $20,000 as it fought the turbines all the way to the state’s public service commission.

Neither the communications director nor the CEO of the American Wind Energy Assn., which spends more than $20 million per year promoting wind power, would comment on the rural opposition to wind turbines. Their refusal isn’t surprising. If the wind lobby – and their myriad allies at the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmental groups – acknowledges turbines’ negative effects on landscapes and rural quality of life, it would subvert their claims that wind energy is truly green.

Just as problematic for the industry’s future: to increase wind-energy production to the levels needed to displace significant quantities of coal, oil and natural gas will require erecting more – and taller – turbines (new models reach to 700 feet). But the more turbines that get installed, and the taller they are, the more nearby residents are likely to object.

Wind energy simply requires too much territory. That means we can’t rely on it for major cuts in emissions. Indeed, the more wind energy encroaches on small towns and suburbs, the more resistance it will face. That resistance will come from homeowners like Park who told me, “We feel this renewable energy push is an attack on rural America.”

Robert Bryce is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and the author, most recently, of “Smaller Faster Lighter Denser Cheaper: How Innovation Keeps Proving the Catastrophists Wrong.”

READ AT: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-bryce-backlash-against-wind-energy-20170227-story.html

Looking for Noise Solutions at Port Ryerse Wind

Port Ryerse Wind is located on the shores of Lake Erie in southern Ontario and is owned by Boralex: (http://www.boralex.com/projects/portryerse) The project has been allowed to be built, operated  and continues to faces strong opposition.  Four Siemens SWT 3.0 113 wind turbine generators began operating in December 2016.  The project already has generated multiple noise complaints from the villagers. Even one of the lease holder hosting a turbine has admitted the noise was louder than anticipated.  READ HERE: https://mothersagainstturbines.com/2017/02/17/boralex-faces-angry-port-ryerse-residents/ 

The project was granted approval by the Ontario government to disturb and intrude upon the first documented nesting site of barn owls in Ontario known in over 5 years. The turbine blades sweep perilous close to an eagle pair and their established nesting territory.  It is just a matter of time for the next Eagle death in Ontario due to wind turbines to occur.  The time is now to stop harming human health and the environment from wind project installations.

February 25, 2017

In response to the media reports of the February 15, 2017 Community Liaison Committee meeting…

As a participant to filling-out Boralex Noise Complaint Forms, there is a serious need to strive toward a solution with the noise generated by the Port Ryerse wind-farm.

One has to give their head a shake as to why four wind turbines were plunked in the middle of the communities of Avalon, Hay Creek and Port Ryerse. As reported, depending on weather and where one lives, the annoying turbine noise in these communities is constant, loud, with serious and confusing audible phasing in certain areas. Residents are quite upset, as they fought against the Ontario Government and lost, and now they are faced with the frustrations experienced by the day-and-night-time noise.

As reported in the media, there was hate witnessed and expressed toward Boralex, their turbine partners, and the Ontario Government at this meeting. An invasion of any sort can spur hatred, and hatred will eat people up inside. Especially over time!

Hate is a powerful word, but in this case it can hold true, as there is a medical term that can be attributed to this hatred; “MISOPHONIAHATRED of NOISE. Clear test results show that it affects the anterior insula, which physically affects amygdala, hippocampus, and frontal cortex creating permanent brain changes by an increase in the myelin wrapping of neurons. In other words, (hard wiring) of the brain to the noise which created this condition.

Think what damage can be done to a child’s brain, when that child grows-up in the environment of wind turbine noise.

This growing psychosis within our communities was created firstly, by those who dreamed of a financial coup by offering up their land to wind turbines. Secondly by a government that took away the voice of the people in order to obtain their objective by implementing the now “halted” Green Energy Act, and thirdly by a company which capitalized on the opportunities presented.

After 500 people had signed a petition, and fought for five years at the Tribunals against the proposal, the communities are now left only with the noise invasion and the reduction in property values.

What SOLUTIONS can be achieved to reduce the noise? Start monitoring right now, when the leaves are off the trees. Not later. Return the voice of the people to our municipal government, by partnering municipal support with concerned residents in an independent monitoring study with clear lines-of-sight to receptors in order to refute, or agree with government findings. The objectives would be to reduce noise to levels agreed upon by the community rate-payers and to enforce the municipal noise bylaws by trimming the pitch on the turbine blades to lessen their impact against the wind, thus reducing the levels of noise and hate. The Provincial Government would then compensate Boralex for their financial loss in energy production, as found in… (Hansard page G-518, last paragraph) “The study found problems and the closest turbine at 456m shut down permanently, the next nearest turbine at 700m, along with three others now run at low rpm so that they’re not emitting as much noise, and then they shut them down at night”.

According to the Ministry of Natural Resources the Port Ryerse Wind Farm is allowed to kill 2 Raptors in one year and no more than 10 bats per turbine in the same year before adjustments to slow down the turbines would ever take place. Another plus for trimming the pitch on the turbines is that it would provide a measure of safety for the immature Bald Eagles within the wind farm if we act soon enough! One Bald Eagle killed will destroy the chances of future successful nestings!!

RW Goodlet
Port Ryerse

PHOTOS COURTESY OF ADAM GOODLET

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Protecting our children from Industrial Wind Power Emissions is our first priority!

%d bloggers like this: