- Acoustics problem[s] associated with wind-farms are due to the infrasonic and low frequencies harmonics and their interaction between several turbines. Those generate annoyances and to higher intensities health effects.
- By using both a time average and frequency weighting, by definition, all those harmonics disappear and as such no assessments ofthe impact of those harmonics can be made.
- To assess those harmonics, it is necessary to use unfiltered data and no time average.
- The low frequencies and infrasmmd effects cannot be assessed by dBA. By design, the A filtering process takes away low frequency and infrasound. Low frequencies and infrasound need to be assessed by dBlin which is unfiltered data according to frequency.
- Annoyance has not been considered in either guideline[.]
- Wind masking has been applied as if it was masking noise of similar frequencies[,] and this is not the case.
- The distance of 1500m as a buffer will not be sufficient for the current size of wind turbine. This distance had originated years ago for much smaller size turbines and at the time was probably a correct distance.
- The noise criteria proposed in the draft wind farm s[t]ate code [will] most likely not protect residents for their health and well-being and will not protect their environmental values.
- It is uncertain and unlikely that the noise criteria proposed in the draft wind farm s[t]ate code will protect animals such as farmed animals for their health and well-being from low and infrasonic noise exposure.
From: Dr Antoine David, PhD, MEng, MAAS, Technical Specialist (Noise), Technical Support Unit, Regulatory Capability and Customer Service, Department of Environment and Heritage Protectsion
Sent: Wednesday, 26 August 2015
To: Paul Roff, Manager, Environmental Planning, Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
CC: Corro EHP ESR RCaCS, Lindsay Delzoppo, Lawrie Wade, David Cook
From: Tony Roberts, Deputy Director-General, Environmental Policy and Planning, Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
Sent: Monday, 7 September 2015
To: Paul Roff, Lawrie Wade (Planning Support)
We have reviewed the draft code (noting that it is based on independent technical advice) and have no concerns.
From: Paul Roff
Sent: Monday, 24 August 2015
To: David Cook, Manager, Technical Support and Community Response, Regulatory Capability and Customer Service, Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
Cc: Carro EHP ESR RCaCS, Lindsay Delzoppo, Antoine David, Carro EHP EPP DDG, Lawrie Wade
I also have been asked to prepare a response to this letter. Lawrie Wade tells me there was a previous letter stating out position that wind farms should not be an ERA. The reply letter needs to restate out opposition to Wind Farms being an ERA.
Download original document: “Right To Information release 15-127”
This article is the work of the author(s) indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding