Resource Documents: Siting (94 items)
Unless indicated otherwise, documents presented here are not the product of nor are they necessarily endorsed by National Wind Watch. These resource documents are shared here 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. • The copyrights reside with the sources indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations.
Author: Rand, Robert
This letter (PDF attached) is respectfully submitted to the Town of Falmouth to provide a qualified professional opinion about the proposed relocation of Wind II. This is submitted independently as a courtesy to the Town free of compensation from any party.
The original permittings for Wind I and Wind II (and NOTUS) resulted in neighbor complaints soon after start-up and were confirmed to exceed Falmouth’s 40-dBA noise limit (turbines sited too close). Weston & Sampson’s relocation recommendation for Wind II appears to be inconsistent with the Town 40 dBA noise limit and the 2017 Barnstable Superior Court Decision.
1. The distance to meet 40 dBA for Wind II, a Vestas V82 with sound power level of 110 dBA, is approximately 891 meters or 2923 feet. This is greater than the setback distances provided by the proposed new location. The proposed new location is still too close.
2. At 2147 and 2244 feet listed in the subject report, the expected sound level is 43 dBA.
3. Use of the proposed new location appears certain to result in the relocated wind turbine’s maximum noise levels exceeding the Falmouth noise limit of 40 dBA.
4. Use of the proposed new location appears certain to result in the relocated wind turbine’s maximum noise levels exceeding established background sound levels of 27-28 dBA by over 10 dB, breaching State 10-dB noise limits.
Supporting detail is provided in the attached PDF. Please contact me if you have any questions.
Robert W. Rand, ASA, INCE
October 26, 2018
Robert W. Rand, Member ASA, INCE
Mr. Julian M. Suso, Town Manager
Mr. Rod Palmer, Building Commissioner
Town of Falmouth
59 Town Hall Square
Falmouth, MA 02540
Re: Wind Turbine Relocation Study, Weston & Sampson Report, October 12, 2018
Download original document: “Re: Wind Turbine Relocation Study”
Author: Rosenquist, Kristi
A Report for the Legislative Energy Commission, 10/19/2017 —
Many Minnesotans report sleep deprivation, migraine headache, vertigo and ringing in the ears after large wind turbines are installed near their homes. Some have left their homes.
MN Department of Health identified low-frequency noise as the most likely cause and confirms that the health of some Minnesotans is being harmed by wind turbines.
Setback distance between a turbine and a home is based on wind turbine noise. State agencies concur that they understand so little about wind turbine noise they cannot even enter into rulemaking on wind turbine noise.
Minnesotans who are harmed have no recourse.
European countries more experienced with wind turbines than Minnesota have setbacks that are 10 times the height of the turbine to the blade tip at its highest point (5000 feet for large modern wind turbines).
- Site permit setback distance from homes is based on “noise” even though the State knows so little about turbine noise they cannot enter into rulemaking on the topic.
- Minnesotans’ homes are inside the turbine Safety Evacuation Zone.
- What studies does the PUC have in front of it and how did they respond?
- Citizens whose health and peaceful enjoyment of their private property are harmed by wind turbines have no recourse.
- PUC approved research of LFN by the University of Minnesota that fails to study LFN in homes and the health of people living next to turbines.
- Audible Noise – agreement that 40 dB(A) should be the limit, but no good measurement protocol to determine if it is met.
- Low-Frequency Noise is the problem. Measurable – but no standards.
- What should the Minnesota Legislature adopt for a siting standard?
- Appendix: Partial list of wind turbine LFN and health studies in PUC Docket 09-845
Download original document: “Wind Turbine Siting in Minnesota: A Report for the Legislative Energy Commission”
Download presentation (view below): “Presentation to the Legislative Energy Commission, October 19, 2017”
On the predominance of unstable atmospheric conditions in the marine boundary layer offshore of the U.S. northeastern coast
Author: Archer, Cristina; et al.
Abstract: The marine boundary layer of the northeastern U.S. is studied with focus on wind speed,
atmospheric stability, and turbulent kinetic energy (TKE), the three most relevant properties in the context
of offshore wind power development. Two long-term observational data sets are analyzed. The first one consists
of multilevel meteorological variables measured up to 60m during 2003–2011 at the offshore Cape Wind tower,
located near the center of the Nantucket Sound. The second data set comes from the 2013–2014 IMPOWR
campaign (Improving the Modeling and Prediction of Offshore Wind Resources), in which wind and wave data
were collected with new instruments on the Cape Wind platform, in addition to meteorological data measured
during 19 flight missions offshore of New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts. It is found that,
in this region: (1) the offshore wind resource is remarkable, with monthly average wind speeds at 60m
exceeding 7m/s all year round, highest winds in winter (10.1m/s) and lowest in summer (7.1m/s), and a
distinct diurnal modulation, especially in summer; (2) the marine boundary layer is predominantly unstable
(61% unstable vs. 21% neutral vs. 18% stable), meaning that mixing is strong, heat fluxes are positive, and the
wind speed profile is often nonlogarithmic (~40% of the time); and (3) the shape of the wind speed profile
(log versus nonlog) is an effective qualitative proxy for atmospheric stability, whereas TKE alone is not.
Cristina L. Archer, Dana L. Veron, Fabrice Veron, College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA
Brian A. Colle, Matthew J. Sienkiewicz, School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, New York, USA
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres 121. doi: 10.1002/2016JD024896
Author: National Institute of Hygiene, National Institute of Public Health, Poland
The National Institute of Public Health–National Institute of Hygiene is of the opinion that wind farms situated too close to buildings intended for permanent human occupation may have a negative impact on the comfort of living and health of the people living in their proximity.
The human health risk factors that the Institute has taken into consideration in its position are as follows:
- the emitted noise level and its dependence on the technical specifications of turbines, wind speed as well as the landform and land use around the wind farm,
- aerodynamic noise level including infrasound emissions and low-frequency noise components,
- the nature of the noise emitted, taking into account its modulation/impulsive/tonal characteristics and the possibility of interference of waves emitted from multiple turbines,
- the risk of ice being flung from rotors,
- the risk of turbine failure with a rotor blade or its part falling,
- the shadow flicker effect,
- the electromagnetic radiation level (in the immediate vicinity of turbines),
- the probability of sleep disruptions and noise propagation at night,
- the level of nuisance and probability of stress and depression symptoms occurring (in consequence of long exposure), related both to noise emissions and to non-acceptance of the noise source.
In the Institute’s opinion, the laws and regulations currently in force in Poland (regarding risk factors which, in practice, include only the noise level) are not only inadequate to facilities such as wind turbines, but they also fail to guarantee a sufficient degree of public health protection. The methodology currently used for environmental impact assessment of wind farms (including human health) is not applicable to wind speeds exceeding 5 m/s. In addition, it does not take into account the full frequency range (in particular, low frequency) and the nuisance level.
In the Institute’s view , owing to the current lack of a comprehensive regulatory framework governing the assessment of health risks related to the operation of wind farms in Poland, an urgent need arises to develop and implement a comprehensive methodology according to which the sufficient distance of wind turbines from human habitation would be determined. The methodology should take into account all the above-mentioned potential risk factors, and its result should reflect the least favourable situation. In addition to landform and land use characteristics, the methodology should also take into consideration the category, type, height and number of turbines at a specific farm, and the location of other wind farms in the vicinity. Similar legislative arrangements aimed to provide for multi-criteria assessment, based on complex numerical algorithms, are currently used in the world.
The Institute is aware of the fact that owing to the diversity of factors and the complicated nature of such an algorithm, its development within a short time period may prove very difficult. Therefore, what seems to be an effective and simpler solution is the prescription of a minimum distance of wind turbines from buildings intended for permanent human occupation. Distance criteria are also a common standard-setting arrangement. Having regard to the above, until a comprehensive methodology is developed for the assessment of the impact of industrial wind farms on human health, the Institute recommends 2 km as the minimum distance of wind farms from buildings. The recommended value results from a critical assessment of research results published in reviewed scientific periodicals with regard to all potential risk factors for average distance usually specified within the fo0llowing limits:
- 0.5-0.7 km, often obtained as a result of calculations, where the noise level (dBA) meets the currently acceptable values (without taking into account adjustments for the impulse/tonal/modulation features of the nose emitted),
- 0.5-3.0 km, resulting from the noise level, taking into account modulation, low frequencies and infrasound levels,
- 0.5-1.4 km, related to the risk of turbine failure with a broken rotor blade or its part falling (depending on the size of the piece and its flight profile, rotor speed and turbine type),
- 0.5-0.8 km, where there is a risk of ice being flung from rotors (depending on the shape and mass of ice, rotor speed and turbine type),
- 1.0-1.6 km, taking into account the noise nuisance level (between 4% and 35% of the population at 30-45 dBA) for people living in the vicinity of wind farms,
- the distance of 1.4-2.5 km, related to the probability of sleep disruptions (on average, between 4% and 5% of the population at 30-45 dBA),
- 2.0 km, related to the occurrence of potential psychological effects resulting from substantial landscape changes (based on the case where the wind turbine is a dominant landscape feature and the rotor movement is clearly visible and noticeable to people from any location),
- 1.2-2.1 km, for the shadow flicker effect (for the average wind turbine height in Poland, including the rotor, of 120 to 210 m).
In its opinions, the Institute has also taken into account the recommended distances of wind farms from buildings, as specified by experts, scientists, as well as central and local government bodies around the world (usually 1.0-5.0 km).