Resource Documents: Impacts (125 items)
Also see NWW "costs/benefits" FAQ
Documents presented here are not the product of nor are they necessarily endorsed by National Wind Watch. These resource documents are provided to assist anyone wishing to research the issue of industrial wind power and the impacts of its development. The information should be evaluated by each reader to come to their own conclusions about the many areas of debate.
Derivation and application of a composite annoyance reaction construct based on multiple wind turbine features
Author: Michaud, David; et al.
Abstract —
Objectives: Noise emissions from wind turbines are one of multiple wind turbine features capable of generating annoyance that ranges in magnitude from not at all annoyed to extremely annoyed. No analysis to date can simultaneously reflect the change in all magnitudes of annoyance toward multiple wind turbine features. The primary objective in this study was to use principal component analysis (PCA) to provide a single construct for overall annoyance to wind turbines based on reactions to noise, blinking lights, shadow flicker, visual impacts, and vibrations evaluated as a function of proximity to wind turbines.
Methods: The analysis was based on data originally collected as part of Health Canada’s cross-sectional Community Noise & Health Study (CNHS). One adult participant (18–79 years), randomly selected from dwellings in Ontario (ON) (n = 1011) and Prince Edward Island (PEI) (n = 227), completed an in-person questionnaire. Content relevant to the current analysis included the annoyance responses to wind turbines.
Results: The first construct tested in the PCA explained 58–69% of the variability in total annoyance. Reduced distance to turbines was associated with elevated aggregate annoyance scores among ON and PEI participants. In the ON sample, aggregate annoyance was effectively absent in areas beyond 5 km (mean 0.12; 95% CI 0.00, 1.19), increasing significantly between 2 and 5 km (mean 2.13; 95% CI 0.92, 3.33), remaining elevated, but with no further increase until (0.550–1] km (mean 3.37; 95% CI 3.02, 3.72). At ≤ 0.550 km, the average overall annoyance was 3.36 (95% CI 2.03, 4.69). In PEI, aggregate annoyance was essentially absent beyond 1 km; i.e., (1–2] km (mean 0.21; 95%CI 0.00, 0.88); 2–5 km (mean 0.00; 95%CI 0.00, 1.37); > 5 km (mean 0.00; 95%CI 0.00, 1.58). Annoyance significantly increased in areas between (0.550 and 1] km (mean 1.59; 95%CI 1.02, 2.15) and was highest within 550 m (mean 4.25; 95% CI 3.34, 5.16).
Conclusion: The advantages and disadvantages to an aggregated annoyance analysis, including how it should not yet be considered a substitute for relationships based on changes in high annoyance, are discussed.
David S. Michaud & James McNamee, Non-Ionizing Radiation Health Sciences Division, Consumer and Clinical Radiation Protection Bureau, Environmental and Radiation Health Sciences Directorate, Health Canada
Leonora Marro, Biostatistics Section, Population Studies Division, Environmental Health Science and Research Bureau, Health Canada
Canadian Journal of Public Health (2018) 109:242–251
doi: 10.17269/s41997-018-0040-y
Download original document: “Derivation and application of a composite annoyance reaction construct based on multiple wind turbine features”
Association between self-reported and objective measures of health and aggregate annoyance scores toward wind turbine installations
Author: Michaud, David; et al.
Abstract —
Objective: An aggregate annoyance construct has been developed to account for annoyance that ranges from not at all annoyed to extremely annoyed, toward multiple wind turbine features. The practical value associated with aggregate annoyance would be strengthened if it was related to health. The objective of the current paper was to assess the association between aggregate annoyance and multiple measures of health.
Methods: The analysis was based on data originally collected as part of Health Canada’s Community Noise and Health Study (CNHS). One adult participant per dwelling (18–79 years), randomly selected from Ontario (ON) (n = 1011) and Prince Edward Island (PEI) (n = 227), completed an in-person questionnaire.
Results: The average aggregate annoyance score for participants who indicated they had a health condition (e.g., chronic pain, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) > 5, tinnitus, migraines/headaches, dizziness, highly sensitive to noise, and reported a high sleep disturbance) ranged from 2.53 to 3.72; the mean score for those who did not report these same conditions ranged between 0.96 and 1.41. Household complaints about wind turbine noise had the highest average aggregate annoyance (8.02), compared to an average of 1.39 among those who did not complain.
Conclusion: A mean aggregate annoyance score that could reliably distinguish participants who self-report health effects (or noise complaints) from those who do not could be one of several factors considered by jurisdictions responsible for decisions regarding wind turbine developments. However, the threshold value for acceptable changes and/or levels in aggregate annoyance has not yet been established and could be the focus of future research efforts.
David S. Michaud & James McNamee, Non-Ionizing Radiation Health Sciences Division, Consumer and Clinical Radiation Protection Bureau, Environmental and Radiation Health Sciences Directorate, Health Canada
Leonora Marro, Biostatistics Section, Population Studies Division, Environmental Health Science and Research Bureau, Health Canada
Canadian Journal of Public Health (2018) 109:252–260
doi: 10.17269/s41997-018-0041-x
Download original document: “The association between self-reported and objective measures of health and aggregate annoyance scores toward wind turbine installations”
Response to Noise Emitted by Wind Farms in People Living in Nearby Areas
Author: Pawlaczyk-Łuszczyńska, Małgorzata; et al.
Abstract: The aim of this study was to evaluate the perception and annoyance of noise from wind turbines in populated areas of Poland. A questionnaire inquiry was carried out among 517 subjects, aged 18–88, living within 204–1726 m from the nearest wind turbine. For areas where respondents lived, A-weighted sound pressure levels (SPLs) were calculated as the sum of the contributions from the wind power plants in the specific area. It has been shown that the wind turbine noise at the calculated A-weighted SPL of 33–50 dB was perceived as annoying or highly annoying by 46% and 28% of respondents, respectively. Moreover, 34% and 18% of them said that they were annoyed or highly annoyed indoors, respectively. The perception of high annoyance was associated with the A-weighted sound pressure level or the distance from the nearest wind turbine, general attitude to wind farms, noise sensitivity and terrain shape (annoyance outdoors) or road-traffic intensity (annoyance indoors). About 48–66% of variance in noise annoyance rating might be explained by the aforesaid factors. It was estimated that at the distance of 1000 m the wind turbine noise might be perceived as highly annoying outdoors by 43% and 2% of people with negative and positive attitude towards wind turbines, respectively. There was no significant association between noise level (or distance) and various health and well-being aspects. However, all variables measuring health and well-being aspects, including stress symptoms, were positively associated with annoyance related to wind turbine noise.
Małgorzata Pawlaczyk-Łuszczyńska, Kamil Zaborowski, Adam Dudarewicz, Małgorzata Zamojska-Daniszewska, Department of Physical Hazards
Małgorzata Waszkowska, Department of Work Psychology
Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine, Lodz, Poland
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2018, 15, 1575; doi: 10.3390/ijerph15081575
Download original document: “Response to Noise Emitted by Wind Farms in People Living in Nearby Areas”
A Review of the Possible Perceptual and Physiological Effects of Wind Turbine Noise
Author: Carlile, Simon; Davy, John; Hillman, David; and Burgemeister, Kym
Abstract:
This review considers the nature of the sound generated by wind turbines focusing on the low-frequency sound (LF) and infrasound (IS) to understand the usefulness of the sound measures where people work and sleep. A second focus concerns the evidence for mechanisms of physiological transduction of LF/IS or the evidence for somatic effects of LF/IS. While the current evidence does not conclusively demonstrate transduction, it does present a strong prima facia case. There are substantial outstanding questions relating to the measurement and propagation of LF and IS and its encoding by the central nervous system relevant to possible perceptual and physiological effects. A range of possible research areas are identified.
Simon Carlile, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sydney, Australia, and Starkey Hearing Research Center, Berkeley, CA, USA
John L. Davy, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology University and CSIRO Infrastructure Technologies, Clayton South, Australia
David Hillman, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, Australia
Kym Burgemeister, Arup, East Melbourne, Australia
Trends in Hearing, Volume 22: 1–10, DOI: 10.1177/2331216518789551
Download original document: “A Review of the Possible Perceptual and Physiological Effects of Wind Turbine Noise”
