Wind Turbine Noise 2005, the first in this series of international conferences, took place in Berlin in 2005. The second WTN conference took place in Lyon, France in 2007 and the third in Aalborg, Denmark in 2009 with more than 160 delegates from 25 countries, representing manufacturers, developers, researchers in noise and vibration, environmentalists, pressure groups and consultants.

The fourth conference in the series will once again provide a venue for all those with an interest in wind turbine noise, and its effects on people, to meet together and also meet with those who design wind turbine installations, both in industry and in the planning process. This conference is organised by INCE/Europe in co-operation with CNR-Istituto di Acustica, the Acoustical Society of Italy and the Italian Solar Energy Society.

Offers of papers for this conference are invited and prospective authors should submit an abstract by 1 November 2010 to organiser@windturbinenoise2011.org. There is a template for this on the website where it is also possible to sign-up to receive further information as the organisation progresses.

Website: http://www.windturbinenoise2011.org

Likely Topics
* Sources of noise in wind turbines and dependence on atmospheric conditions
* Wind turbine noise modelling
* Microturbines including machines for urban projects
* Interactions of wind turbines in wind farms
* Design for low noise
* Propagation of wind turbine noise over land and water
* Wind turbines offshore
* Vibration from wind turbines
* Standards and regulations
* Effects of wind turbine noise on individuals and collective behaviour
* Planning requirements and decision-making
* Acoustic monitoring and surveillance
* Condition Monitoring
* Future prospects
And any other topic related to wind turbine noise and vibration, their generation, propagation and effects.

There is also an introductory course on noise on the afternoon prior to the conference which has proven very popular in previous years.

The conference language is English but the possibility of simultaneous translation into Italian is under consideration and will depend upon likely demand.

CD-Roms of the Proceedings of the previous conferences are available from the INCE/Europe office.

Further information from:
Cathy Mackenzie
Conference Secretary, INCE/Europe
Riverside House, 4 Oakland Vale, New Brighton, Merseyside CH45 1LQ, UK
Tel: +44 (0)151 638 0281 Fax:+44 (0)151 639 5212
email: cathy@cmmsoffice.demon.co.uk

Click here to sign if you are a U.K. citizen (deadline 16 April 2010)

ETSU-R-97 is woefully out of date for measuring noise generated by current wind turbines & not fit for purpose and any wind turbine development planned or proposed using ETSU-R-97 should be cancelled immediately.

ETSU-R-97 is:

• 12 years out of date based on smaller turbines (15-30 metres) versus today’s 125-130 metre turbines and 2++ megawatts installed capacity
• did not conduct an independent study
• did not fulfil promise to update the findings in 1999
• quotes WHO which they used to calculate night time noise levels written THIRTY years ago
• is more appropriate for measuring noisy urban locations than for quiet rural locations where many onshore turbines are planned.
• is the only guideline that suggests a higher noise level at night!
• does not specify maximum noise permitted
• does not account noisy wind shear associated with current tall turbines
• ignores WHO Guidelines for Community Noise 1999
• does not protect our communities from unbearable noise pollution
• ignores Parliament enacting the Human Rights Act 1998

Attending all the informational meetings in Lowell concerning the current effort to erect 400 foot wind turbines, covering several miles of the Lowell Mountain ridge line, leaves me troubled by the questions that have not been answered – perhaps not even asked yet. When we meet as a community we should always look at that underlying question; How will we offer our children and grandchildren a life, here in our towns, with a decent standard of living? It is short sighted to sacrifice the natural beauty of our lands, and mountains, for a quick cash offer that destroys potential long range solutions that rest in the natural beauty of the area. Yes, you can eat the view if you develop it right.

Discussions with Lowell Selectmen convince me they are too eager to complete a deal with Green Mountain Power to sufficiently consider all the issues. They have only looked at an agreement for the potential payment to the town in lieu of taxes which the developer wants before going forward. The Selectboard has not disclosed the terms of the agreement to us, but with deliberation and bargaining, they could require consideration of all the issues that are of concern to the greater Lowell community as well as just Lowell voters.

Lowell voters are left with the responsibility in seeing around the dangled carrot of quick money in exchange for our mountain range. Developers do not go away when they are initially rejected. It happens all the time in the Act 250 process. They refine the proposal and return, having addressed the issues raised. With the wind tower concept some of the serious questions relate to the health and quality of life of people living near the site. How near? What is an acceptable plan? None is being considered.

The agreement between Mr. Wileman’s company and Green Mountain Power, is recorded in Lowell Land Records Book 55. With this agreement, in exchange for a large and continuing payment, Mr. Wileman has sold his rights as follows:

Grantor grants and conveys to Grantee a non-exclusive easement, right and entitlement on, over, across and under the Property to permit the Wind Farm or any component thereof to impact view or visual effects from the Property; to cause vibration; to cause electromagnetic and frequency interference; to cast shadows (including, without limitation, any from the turbines and moving blades) onto the Property, to interfere with television, radio or satellite reception, or to emit noise or sounds caused by the construction or operation of the Wind Farm.

This should cause Lowell voters and all folks in the surrounding affected areas to demand answers. What if our television, radio, or satellite reception is damaged? How about electromagnetic and frequency interference? Vibration? What if those of us who live along Route 100, or on Irish Hill, or over Albany way, or God knows where, experience these problems? Who do we turn to? Who protects us? Who pays for our solution?

LEGAL ISSUE?

“Shall the voters of the Town of Lowell approve the concept of a wind project in the town as proposed by Green Mountain Power Corporation and the Vermont Electric Cooperative provided that an agreement is reached between the Town and the developers that would bring a minimum of $400,000 per year to the Town of Lowell.”

In the Handbook for Vermont Selectboards, as prepared and distributed by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, I find the following caution to Selectboards:

The board must be careful not to put language into an article that may be construed to sway the voter. For example, adding “If this article is approved it will mean an increase of three cents on the tax rate” or “This article is on as a special request of the recreation department” could reasonably be interpreted to influence a voter’s thought process and likelihood of voting in a certain way. Even a parenthetical “On the warning by petition” should not appear, as it may be interpreted to mean that the Selectboard really does not approve of it and is throwing a disclaimer of responsibility for it.

Does the warning article as presented to you by Australian ballot pass this test? What is your reaction to the inclusion of the words, “… that would bring a minimum of $400,000.00 per year to the Town of Lowell?”

A “No” vote will eliminate any question of a legal challenge costly to the Town of Lowell. A “No” vote will allow due deliberation of “the concept as proposed by Green Mountain Power and VT Electric Co-Op.”

Respectfully Submitted,
David Stackpole
Beaulieu Road, Lowell

Download original document: “A ‘No’ Vote at Lowell Town Meeting, March 2″

Southpoint Wind will be holding initial public meetings regarding the Leamington, Union, Kingsville, Colchester, Lakewood Beach, Lakeshore, Deerbrook, Lighthouse Cove, Cedar Springs, Sandison, Port Crewe, Port Alma and Wheatley sites for the proposed 1400MW Offshore Wind Energy Project. These meetings are intended to introduce this project and will take place on Saturday, March 27th, 2010, in the following communities surrounding the project:

In Lakeshore (Municipality of Lakeshore) at:
Puce Sports & Leisure Centre (962 Old Tecumseh Road) – Room 1A
8:30 a.m. – 9:30 a.m.

In Chatham (Municipality of Chatham-Kent) at:
Wheels Inn (615 Richmond Street) – Coach Room
10:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.

In Kingsville (Municipality of Kingsville) at:
Kingsville Arena (1741 Jasperson Lane) – Meeting Room
12:00 p.m. – 2:00p.m.

In Leamington (Municipality of Leamington) at:
Princess Centre (33 Princess Street) – Conference Room 302B
3:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.

In Harrow (Municipality of Essex) at:
Harrow & Colchester South Arena (243 McAffee Street)
6:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.

In Amherstburg (Municipality of Amherstburg) at:
Cultural Centre/Recreation Centre – Small Room
7:30 p.m. – 8:30 p.m.

For more information and to view a copy of the Draft Project Description Report for this project please visit www.southpointwind.com.

Greeny Grinch Turbines!

You’re a mean one, “Greeny Grinch”!
… not as environmental as you seem.
destroying our conservation land
in an effort to go green,
Greeny Grinch!

It is quite ironic,
as our senate proposes,
to build monstrous Wind Turbines
– right under our noses.

People of Massachusetts … I declare in scores …
Cape Cod, the Islands & Berkshires are YOURS
not greedy wind miners & political wars!
Greeny Grinch!

To the U.S. government –we cry and we plead,
“clean energy is great, we concede.
But you cannot deny to the public’s dismay,
these colossal wind turbines are not as ‘green’ as they say.”
Greeny Grinch!

From the outside, turbines seem all well and good …
even to some environmentalists who have misunderstood …
the alarming number of side effects involved …
to these once “conservation lands” that will be dissolved.

Excessive noise, flickering light,
vibrating land & dead birds of flight.
& not to mention in studies done overseas,
linking turbines with cancer & disease!
Greeny Grinch!

“It’s fine over there, but not here,” we say!
“Not in my backyard!” Cry as we may!
Nobody wants these hideous machines –
destroying their OWN neighborhoods & childhood dreams!

Given the CHOICE of turbines as neighbors –
I would rather live next door to a seasick crocodile!

Wouldn’t you?

Massachusetts has been challenged they say –
to be the 1st U.S. state to go green …Chop! Chop! Today!
Without taking sufficient time to do it in a “responsible” way.
Greeny Grinch!

Each town in a race to do their part “green”
hoping to cash in on these enormous machines.

Our own legislature is trying to cinch,
a bill to speedy up this cruel “greeny grinch”!
New bylaws and rezoning land in a pinch!
Greeny Grinch!

Bill no. 2245 passed the Senate with ease,
simply stating, “We can put up giant wind turbines WHEREVER we please!”
Spreading across our land like disease!
Greeny Grinch!

All to avoid being mangled-up in tangled up knots!
asking the House to let them solely choose the Turbine spots!
What about the rights of the people?
Greeny Grinch!

As “UNITED” States we should agree and decide
to only build turbines where NO PEOPLE reside!
Then share the economics as ONE country, one land!
Not separate states, with all different stands!
Greeny Grinch!

The economics of the proposal are weighted without care -
our citizens left with the burden to bare.
What was the point of the Constitution? Our forefathers would say,
“Shame on you, for mistreating our laws this way!”

Why not take a stand against this issue, TODAY!

The three words that best describe this situation are as follows ….
and I quote!,
“Stink!”
“Stank!”
“Stunk!”

There will be four speakers:

• Lisa Linowes, Executive Director for the Industrial Wind Action (IWA) Group, a national advocacy organization focused on the impact/benefits analysis and policy issues associated with industrial wind power development, has presented and debated wind energy issues at venues across the United States including the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), Society of Environmental Journalists, and the Boston Museum of Science lecture series. She has appeared on CNN, NPR, and the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric, as well as in the New York Times, Washington Post, and Christian Science Monitor
• Dr. Stanley Shapiro, MD, FACC, a cardiologist who practices in Rutland and Burlington, has been faculty at the UVM Medical School for 24 years and served on the Board of Governors for the American College of Cardiology. His presentation will focus on the health effects of sleep deprivation and the complexity of health issues associated with industrial wind turbines. He is not speaking on behalf of any organization or hospital
• Orleans County realtor, Dan McClure will talk about property values
• Lempster, NH property owner Justin Lindholm will share his observations about the recently installed industrial wind turbines in that town.

As experience and problems with industrial wind installations grows, government bodies and health organizations are starting to weigh in. The North Carolina senate voted 42 -1 recently to ban wind turbines on the state’s scenic western ridgelines. In September 2009 the Maine Medical Association adopted a resolution regarding wind power development and public health. In France, a decision issued by the Court of Appeal of Rennes, Dec. 1, 2009 ordered the eight wind turbines installed in Cast, Châteaulin and Plomodiern be stopped from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. In Vermont, with at least five industrial wind power installations under consideration, including one in Lowell, Rep. David Potter from Clarendon recently introduced a bill that would put more controls on wind development.

The Lowell Mountain Wind Group is hosting this information meeting to ensure that residents of Lowell and the surrounding towns understand why dozens of communities across America and elsewhere are questioning existing and proposed industrial wind installations. Attendees will also learn why countries that have been leaders in industrial wind are cutting back subsidies and limiting the amount of power generated from wind turbines. All are welcome and encouraged to bring questions.

We also request that the importance of this scenic landscape is recognised by the Welsh Assembly Government by dropping it from the wind energy target areas.

Sign the petition

Background (Preamble):

One of the last truly remote, wild and undeveloped parts of southern Britain, the Cambrian Mountains are epitomised by the iconic mountain Pumlumon, source of the Wye, Severn, and Rheidol. Its north-western flanks rise from a hilly plateau, which plunges precipitously into the Dyfi valley from a jagged escarpment, fretted by a series of majestic waterfalls.

This area contains a blend of moorland hills and forests around the fjord-like waters of Llyn Nant-y-Moch, created forty-years ago to generate hydro-electric power, but now helping to produce a dramatic and unique landscape. The Countryside Council for Wales’ Landmap assessment classes this area as ‘Outstanding’ – its highest rating reserved for areas ‘of international or national importance’. In addition, much of the area forms part of the Dyfi Biosphere, a United Nations designation and the only one in Wales.

The area is rich in archaeological remains and is famous in Welsh history as the setting for Owain Glyndwr’s defeat of the Anglo-Flemish forces at the battle of Hyddgen in 1401 prior to his establishment of a Welsh parliament at Machynlleth in 1404. In the nineteenth century, the writer George Borrow climbed Pumlumon in his walk around Wales. In his influential book Wild Wales, he relates how he was awestruck at the scale and beauty of this remote landscape. In 1947 the Cambrian Mountains were selected as a ‘Conservation Area’ in the Hobhouse Report; in 1965 officially proposed as a National Park; and in 1972 designated as such by the Countryside Commission, citing that the “deep wooded valleys and gorges, their rolling moorlands are colourful at all seasons and are one of Britain’s loveliest and most attractive countrysides …. attracting discerning visitors in increasing numbers who appreciate that this ‘spirit of Wales’ is the equal in beauty of many existing national parks.” Designation was never confirmed but there is currently a campaign to recognise the landscape as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (a status equal to that of a National Park).

Despite this history and the quality of the landscape, the giant energy corporation Scottish and Southern Energy plc (SSE) is planning to build an enormous wind power station dominating hill crests and forest skylines in a site area of 5 miles by 5 miles with 60 to 80 turbines each proposed to be 145m or 475 feet tall. This is one and a half times the height of Big Ben, and as much as three times the height of turbines used in much smaller earlier projects in Ceredigion. This project would industrialise views towards the Snowdonia National Park from Pumlumon (and vice-versa) and devastate the landscape character, tranquillity and recreational value of the Nant y Moch area.

Why is SSE targeting this outstanding landscape? The Welsh Assembly Government has targeted seven ‘Strategic Search Areas’ for wind power stations. They were primarily defined by wind speed, while filtering out National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, but did not reflect the conclusions of CCW’s Landmap assessment. Although there was a consultation process, responses were over-ruled which pointed out the scenic value of Nant y Moch and its history. Other Search Areas are larger, outside areas of national importance, and targets are being met and exceeded by several proposals in each. In its rush to meet arbitrary targets the Welsh Assembly Government is in this case promoting the destruction of a landscape of great cultural and national significance.

This petition is supported by the Cambrian Mountains Society.

http://www.gopetition.co.uk/online/33775.html

[Colby and Leventhall and the audience of this webinar need to hear from the people they say don't exist about the symptoms they say aren't real.]

Please join us Thursday February 11th at 11am EST for a discussion of the myths and facts behind wind turbine syndrome and how scientific research is used to both support and deny the claims made.

Attendees will hear experts in sound impacts discuss:

• The science of sound;
• Overview of wind turbine syndrome;
• Published research on sound impacts and how it is used to both support and deny claims of wind turbine syndrome;
• How the “nocebo” effect plays a role (A nocebo response occurs when the suggestion of a negative effect of an action leads to an actual negative outcome)

Who should attend?

• Landowners
• Local and state government officials
• Wind developers
• Renewable energy advocates

Format: There will be approximately 30 minutes of presentations followed by Q&A.

Speakers:

• W. David Colby, M.D.: Chatham-Kent Medical Officer of Health (Acting); Associate Professor, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Western Ontario
• Geoff Leventhall, Ph.D.: Consultant in Noise Vibration and Acoustics, UK

Connection Instructions:
You will need an internet connection and a phone line to participate in this webinar. Simply copy the link below into your web browser to connect – you do not need to pre-register. In order to hear the audio, you will need to call into one of the phone numbers below.

Audio Access: Toll Free: 877-951-7311; Toll: 203-607-0666; Participant Passcode: 9348502

Web Access: https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=P W1627857&p=9348502&t=c or: https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/, Conference number PW1627857, Audience passcode 9348502

Questions or issues with connecting to the webinar? Please contact Sue Hinnen at NREL (Susan.Hinnen@nrel.gov).

Questions or comments about the webinar topic, speakers, or the Great Lakes Regional Wind Energy Institute? Please contact Christina Mills at Windustry (Christina@windustry.org) or visit http://www.windustry.org/GLRWEI

The Government has published a draft set of National Policy Statements concerned with various large infrastructure projects. Of these, No.3 is concerned with Renewable Energy including onshore wind farms.

http://data.energynpsconsultation.decc.gov.uk/documents/npss/EN-3.pdf

This section on onshore wind farms includes a number of points which we would consider to be undesirable or plain wrong:

• There is a section on “proximity to dwellings” which mentions “appropriate distances” but does not give any specific details of what might be appropriate.
• It claims that a wind farm of 25 years’ life (with an option to “repower”) is not to be considered permanent!
• It says that “there will always be significant landscape and visual effects” without saying that the wind farm should not be built if these are unacceptable.
• It states that ETSU-R-97 should be used for noise assessments without pointing out its multiple defects.
• it states that shadow flicker should be considered for a turbine within 10 rotor diameters of a house: I have not seen any justification for this distance.
• etc etc

There is a real opportunity to make your voice heard by making your points and comments. There is a deadline of February 22nd, so please act quickly.

http://www.nationalpolicystatements.org.uk/page2.html
https://www.energynpsconsultation.decc.gov.uk/home/responding/

Spread the word to as many people as possible for them to put in comments, to try to get the Policy Statement changed? We need to all make our voices heard, irrelevant of the timescales involved.

Thanks in advance.