LOW BENEFIT ↔ MUCH HARM

Resource Documents: France (17 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.

Date added: March 13, 2023
France •

Une éolienne sur votre terrain ? Réfléchissez bien !

Author: Bertrand, Marianne

[A wind turbine on your land? Think carefully!]

Cela commence par des repérages, cartes à l’appui, effectués par un développeur (promoteur) à la recherche de sites propices à l’implantation d’éoliennes. À peine 20 % du territoire étant accessible à cette énergie renouvelable, du fait des contraintes imposées par la réglementation aux opérateurs (distance des habitations, topographie, exposition au vent, aviation civile, radars météo et militaires, couloirs de migration …), dès qu’un terrain remplit les critères, il est aussitôt convoité.

Cibles de choix, les terres agricoles

Les propriétaires concernés sont ceux dont la parcelle, d’au moins 3 000 m², se situe à 500 mètres au minimum d’une habitation. Certes, l’implantation d’une éolienne est théoriquement possible à partir de 2 000 m² de superficie. Mais aucun prospecteur ne se déplacera pour une seule machine. Et pour cause : la préfecture – devant laquelle le promoteur dépose une demande d’autorisation environnementale – ne s’y intéressera pas, comme l’explique Thierry Daumas, responsable de la prospection de l’éolien pour la région Centre et Nord-Est chez Neoen, premier producteur français d’énergies renouvelables. Il doit aussi s’agir d’un terrain agricole, ou d’un secteur forestier (idéalement en période de coupe pour en faciliter l’accès), voire d’une parcelle classée en zone naturelle. Mais non d’un terrain constructible. « Une telle prospection nous ferait prendre des risques au regard des habitations et des autorisations d’urbanisme pouvant être accordées. D’ailleurs, en zone urbaine, on porte la distance à trois fois la hauteur de l’éolienne, par exemple à 600 m pour une éolienne de 200²m de haut, donc au-delà des 500 m réglementaires », rassure Guillaume Decaen, responsable du dévegis loppement en France chez Neoen.

Le propriétaire aux commandes

Vous êtes concerné ? Attendez-vous à recevoir, si ce n’est déjà fait, un courrier ou la visite d’un opérateur vous expliquant qu’il a identifié « une zone d’implantation potentielle » pour ses éoliennes – dans laquelle se situe votre terrain –, et qu’il a le feu vert de la mairie. « Nous intervenons uniquement dans un secteur où le maire est enclin à accepter le projet sur son territoire », confirme Thierry Daumas. Ce point n’est en effet jamais acquis, les édiles appréciant diversement l’accueil de mâts sur leur commune. Si c’est un préalable, cela ne suffit pas. Le maire n’est en effet pas décisionnaire, malgré des pouvoirs bientôt élargis. La balle est en réalité dans le camp du préfet, qui délivre – très largement – les autorisations. Encore faut-il obtenir en amont l’accord du ou des propriétaires concernés. « Il faut garder à l’esprit que, s’agissant d’un projet privé sur un terrain privé, tout dépend de leur seul bon vouloir. Rien ne se fera s’ils refusent de s’engager dans l’opération », insiste Jérôme Richard, référent pour l’association Belle Normandie Environnement, devenu lanceur d’alerte depuis qu’il a été prospecté sur ses propres parcelles agricoles et forestières. Des propriétaires auxquels un démarcheur commercial de l’éolien va sortir le grand jeu, en les flattant sur leur rôle d’acteur incontournable de la reconversion énergétique.

Surtout, en leur faisant miroiter une redevance substantielle en contrepartie de l’implantation des machines. Une fois déployé son argumentaire, l’opérateur avance alors vite ses pions pour tenter d’emporter l’adhésion du propriétaire. L’objectif, parvenir à lui faire signer une promesse de bail emphytéotique (très longue durée), par laquelle ce dernier s’engage à lui louer sa parcelle en vue de l’implantation des éoliennes. Les mâts eux-mêmes, arriveront éventuellement plus tard, ainsi que le paiement de la redevance. Pourquoi ne pas lui acheter directement la parcelle ? Parce que l’opérateur n’y a aucun intérêt financier puisqu’il devrait alors gérer, au terme de la durée d’exploitation des éoliennes, leur très coûteux démantèlement (voir ci-contre). Loin de l’avouer, il préfère invoquer un risque de préemption par les Sociétés d’aménagement foncier et d’établissement rural (Safer).

Des promesses arrachées

Pour obtenir leur promesse de bail, certains démarcheurs se montrent peu scrupuleux.« Nous avons eu connaissance de cas de promesses arrachées, sur un coin de table, à des personnes âgées. Ce sont leurs enfants, qui, en désespoir de cause, sont venus nous trouver », témoigne ainsi Yves Melin, coordinateur du collectif Vosges Horizon Durable, qui regroupe cinq associations de défense en matière environnementale. Tous les moyens sont bons pour emporter un marché, avec des mesures compensatoires telles la fourniture d’un véhicule électrique, le goudronnage du chemin menant aux terrains… Quand ce ne sont pas des manœuvres d’intimidation. « Il est d’autant plus facile pour les promoteurs, sachant que les propriétaires ne sont pas censés communiquer entre eux, de jouer les uns contre les autres. Typiquement en arguant que celui qui refuse l’implantation sur son terrain s’exposera aux éoliennes du voisin, sans en avoir les avantages financiers », renchérit Yves Melin. Règle d’or, ne pas se laisser impressionner et prendre le temps de la réflexion, d’autant que le montage juridique est complexe.

Donner l’accès au terrain

Outre la promesse, l’opérateur doit obtenir l’accès au terrain du propriétaire. « Cette étape correspond aux prémices pour monter un parc éolien. Elle permet au promoteur de vérifier si son projet est viable. L’autorisation préalable du propriétaire est requise car il s’agit d’effectuer des relevés, parfois de placer un mât de mesure du vent ou encore d’obtenir au nom de la société d’exploitation un permis de construire, sur un terrain qui lui appartient », souligne Louise Prouvost-Claeys, notaire à L’Arbresle (69). Vous serez donc amené à signer divers documents : une promesse unilatérale de bail emphytéotique et de constitution de servitudes (élargissement du chemin d’accès, passage de câbles, survol du terrain voisin par les pales…) et une convention de mise à disposition du terrain. Mais à ce stade, les contrats s’établissent sous seing privé, entre les parties. C’est pourquoi vous avez intérêt, avant de signer, à consulter un notaire ou un avocat au fait des problématiques des énergies renouvelables. Alors que vous avez encore la main, ils vous aideront à comprendre à quoi vous vous engagez réellement.

Ainsi, les machines sont décrites partiellement dans les promesses, notamment la mention de leur hauteur, le promoteur ayant toujours la possibilité de solliciter un permis modificatif en cours de route pour la mise en place d’éoliennes plus performantes… Autre sujet légitime d’interrogation, la redevance. Au stade de la promesse, l’opérateur propose uniquement un montant au mégawatt (MW), avec une clause de révision du prix (souvent fixe avant la mise en service des éoliennes, puis fonction du chiffre d’affaires de l’exploitant). Un montant censé être commun aux propriétaires faisant partie de la même zone ciblée. Mais vous ne vous verrez jamais annoncer un loyer global. Les opérateurs expliquent qu’il dépendra de la puissance des éoliennes qui seront implantées sur votre terrain, de leur taille, des obstacles, etc. Il vous sera difficile d’en savoir plus, même en vous rapprochant d’une association locale de défense de riverains. Car signer avec un opérateur engage à la confidentialité sur le prix. Ce manque de transparence ne doit surtout pas vous empêcher de négocier. « Il est d’autant plus conseillé de discuter le prix que l’insistance redoublée du démarcheur vous fait pressentir que votre terrain répond à ses attentes… », pointe d’expérience un propriétaire sous couvert d’anonymat.

Moyennant quoi, vous ne toucherez peut-être jamais cette redevance. « Le propriétaire n’a aucune garantie que le promoteur va bien implanter les éoliennes sur son terrain à l’issue de la phase d’études préalables », souligne Jérôme Richard. S’il y renonce – ce qu’il peut faire sans avoir besoin de se justifier –, vous ne pourrez alors prétendre qu’à une indemnité au titre des servitudes prévues au contrat. Le calcul est vite fait : « l’implantation d’un mât de mesure se monnaie 500 € par an et la pose d’un profileur de vent [radar, Ndlr] 150 € par an. Le fait de laisser l’accès sans limite à la parcelle pour prendre ces mesures, n’est en revanche pas pris en compte. Quant à la servitude pour le passage des câbles, c’est autour de 3 € du mètre linéaire », résume Émily Callède-Auvray, avocate au barreau de Paris.

Engagé pour 40 ans au moins

« Cette contrepartie financière se révèle dérisoire au regard des contraintes imposées au propriétaire ou à son locataire, qui n’a déjà plus vraiment la disponibilité du terrain », dénonce-t-elle. Sachant qu’il aura pu s’écouler 5 ans depuis la signature de la promesse – et même 7 en cas de prolongation (fréquente). Il reste parfois possible, pendant la durée de la promesse, de revoir les conditions financières. « Nous avons déjà été amenés à renégocier avec un propriétaire en jouant sur la durée de son engagement, revue à la hausse, pour lui permettre une meilleure rémunération. Ou bien en présence des héritiers du propriétaire, décédé entretemps, nous avons proposé un autre mode de rétribution, comme une avance sur les loyers des 10 prochaines années », illustre Guillaume Decaen.

À supposer que le promoteur, muni des autorisations nécessaires, finisse par se décider à installer les éoliennes sur votre terrain, vous allez enfin pouvoir signer le bail emphytéotique (5) définitif intégrant la convention finale de constitution de servitudes devant notaire. Et percevoir la redevance. Lisez bien ces documents : vous vous engagez pour longtemps et certaines clauses sont piégeuses. « D’autant que l’emphytéose donne au locataire – le promoteur – des droits très importants, et notamment celui d’hypothéquer la parcelle louée, en l’occurrence au profit d’une banque, pour se refinancer », pointe Louise Prouvost-Claeys. C’est ce qui explique que la marge de négociation des propriétaires soit limitée, hormis sur le prix et le démantèlement des éoliennes. « La banque exige des contrats uniformes pour pouvoir assurer la revente du parc en cas de faillite de l’opérateur », dévoile Jérôme Richard. Quant à la durée du bail, elle est, par définition, très longue (entre 18 et 99 ans). Vous signez en général pour 40 ans reconductibles, voire 80 ans, selon les contrats. Le temps nécessaire à l’amortissement du projet éolien. Autant dire qu’un propriétaire engage souvent ses héritiersdansl’opération.

(((( o ))))

Les 5 clauses qui fâchent

Certaines clauses du bail ou de la convention de mise à disposition du terrain pénalisent les propriétaires et les riverains. Mieux vaut donc en saisir l’enjeu pour faire revoir sa copie au promoteur ou renoncer à la signature.

1. l’Exclusivité de l’opérateur

Cette clause interdit au propriétaire d’étudier les offres des autres opérateurs du marché, au stade de la promesse de convention de bail et de la mise à disposition du terrain, et pendant toute sa durée (de 8 à 10 ans en moyenne).

L’exclusivité s’étend à toutes ses parcelles situées dans un rayon de plusieurs kilomètres autour du projet, même celles que le promoteur n’a pas ciblées au départ (non mitoyennes de la zone).

Elle bénéficie aux repreneurs éventuels (souvent étrangers) de l’opérateur.

2. Le remplacement possible de l’opérateur

Cette clause permet la revente en cascade de sociétés exploitantes, après notification au propriétaire de la substitution.

Le propriétaire se voit imposer un contractant qu’il n’a pas choisi.

Il est privé de tout recours envers la société d’origine. Un risque pèse à l’échéance du bail, pour lui ou ses héritiers, en cas d’insolvabilité de la société tierce qui exploitera alors les éoliennes.

3. l’Interdiction de planter

Cette disposition empêche le propriétaire de planter arbres et haies pendant toute la durée du bail, le contraignant à laisser son terrain vierge (une fois arasé par le promoteur). Pourtant, un arbre ne peut gêner le fonctionnement d’une éolienne qu’à partir de 20 mètres de hauteur. Cette prohibition vise à empêcher que les oiseaux et chauves-souris ne reviennent sur le zonage de l’opérateur (obstacles à l’agrandissement et au repowering, voir le point 4).

Aucune contrepartie financière n’est prévue au contrat malgré la perte de valeur de la parcelle.

4. Le renouvellement des éoliennes

La société exploitante a la faculté de rééquiper son parc éolien avec des machines plus performantes (repowering), sachant que leur durée de vie est de toute façon limitée à 20 ans en moyenne (pour la génération actuelle).

Les installations sont alors modifiées selon les critères de l’exploitant, sans concertation avec le propriétaire bien que la surface engagée, la puissance et la hauteur évoluent.

Le propriétaire n’a aucune garantie que des mâts d’éoliennes seront à nouveau implantés sur son terrain. Le bail emphytéotique serait alors résilié partiellement, avec maintien des servitudes.

5. Le démantèlement des installations

Cette obligation, encadrée par la loi, incombe à la société d’exploitation au moment de la cessation du parc. Elle porte sur les installations et l’excavation des fondations en béton. Une provision financière est prévue (garantie bancaire) à la mise en service du parc, calculée selon la puissance de l’éolienne (50 000 € par mât de 2 MW et 25 000 € par MW supplémentaire). Mais elle est sous-évaluée par rapport à la réalité (jusqu’à 400 000 € par éolienne).

Le coût final des travaux revient, en cas de dépassement, au propriétaire (ou à ses héritiers).

Les clauses du bail emphytéotique, reprenant strictement la loi, ne prévoient aucune obligation de remise en état finale de la parcelle.

Sa perte de valeur n’est pas non plus prise en compte. La question de la dépollution des sols (huile de turbine d’éolienne) n’est pas envisagée.

Par Marianne Bertrand
Le Particulier Immobilier, March 2023, no. 403, pp. 20-25

Download original document: “Une éolienne sur votre terrain ? Réfléchissez bien !”

Date added: May 19, 2017
France, Health, Noise •

Nuisances Sanitaires des Éoliennes Terrestres — Académie Nationale de Médecine

Author: Tran Ba Huy, Patrice; and French Academy of Medicine

“[L]e caractère intermittent, aléatoire, imprévisible, envahissant du bruit généré par la rotation des pales, survenant lorsque le vent se lève, variant avec son intensité, interdisant toute habituation, peut indubitablement perturber l’état psychologique de ceux qui y sont exposés. Ce sont notamment les modulations d’amplitudes causées par le passage des pales devant le mât qui sont dénoncées comme particulièrement dérangeantes. [The intermittent, random, unpredictable, invasive character of the noise generated by the rotation of the blades, arising when the wind rises and varying along with its intensity, preventing habituation, can undoubtedly disturb the psychological state of those who are exposed to it. These include amplitude modulation caused by the passage of the blades in front of the mast, which is noted as particularly disturbing.]

“[L]e groupe de travail recommande: … de revenir pour ce qui concerne leur bruit (et tout en laissant les éoliennes sous le régime des Installations Classées pour le Protection de l’Environnement) au décret du 31 août 2006 relatif à la lutte contre les bruits du voisinage (relevant du code de Santé publique et non de celui de l’Environnement), ramenant le seuil de déclenchement des mesures d’émergence à 30 dB A à l’extérieur des habitations et à 25 à l’intérieur.” [The working group recommends returning to the decree of 31 August 2006 concerning the fight against neighborhood noise, reducing the the threshold for emergency measures to [ambient levels] 30 dBA outside residences and 25 dBA inside [limiting wind turbine noise to +5 dBA in daytime (7am–10pm) and +3 dBA at night (10pm–7am)].]

Resumé

L’extension programmée de la filière éolienne terrestre soulève un nombre croissant de plaintes de la part d’associations de riverains faisant état de troubles fonctionnels réalisant ce qu’il est convenu d’appeler le « syndrome de l’éolienne ». Le but de ce rapport était d’en analyser l’impact sanitaire réel et de proposer des recommandations susceptibles d’en diminuer la portée éventuelle.

Si l’éolien terrestre ne semble pas induire directement des pathologies organiques,il affecte au travers de ses nuisances sonores et surtout visuelles la qualité de vie d’une partie des riverains et donc leur « état de complet bien-être physique, mental et social » lequel définit aujourd’hui le concept de santé.

Dans le double souci d’améliorer l’acceptation du fait éolien et d’atténuer son retentissement sanitaire, direct ou indirect, le groupe de travail recommande :

de s’assurer que lors de la procédure d’autorisation l’enquête publique soit conduite avec le souci d’informer pleinement les populations riveraines, de faciliter la concertation entre elles et les exploitants, et de faciliter la saisine du préfet par les plaignants,

de n’autoriser l’implantation de nouvelles éoliennes que dans des zones ayant fait l’objet d’un consensus de la population concernée quant à leur impact visuel, sachant que l’augmentation de leur taille et leur extension programmée risquent d’altérer durablement le paysage du pays et de susciter de la part de la population riveraine – et générale – opposition et ressentiment avec leurs conséquences psychiques et somatiques,

de systématiser les contrôles de conformité acoustique dont la périodicité doit être précisée dans tous les arrêtés d’autorisation et non au cas par cas,

d’encourager les innovations technologiques susceptibles de restreindre et de « brider » en temps réel le bruit émis par les éoliennes et d’en équiper les éoliennes les plus anciennes,

de ramener le seuil de déclenchement des mesures d’émergence à 30 dBA à l’extérieur des habitations et à 25 à l’intérieur, (tout en laissant les éoliennes sous le régime des Installations Classées pour le Protection de l’Environnement),

d’entreprendre, comme recommandé dans le précédent rapport, une étude épidémiologique prospective sur les nuisances sanitaires.

May 9, 2017

Patrice Tran Ba Huy, Membre de l’Académie de Médecine

Download original document: “Nuisances Sanitaires des Éoliennes Terrestres”

See also: “Le retentissement du fonctionnement des éoliennes sur la santé de l’homme” (Académie Nationale de Médecine, 2006)

Date added: August 1, 2015
Australia, Denmark, France, Germany, Health, Massachusetts, Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden •

Lilli-Anne Green before the Senate Select Committee on Wind Turbines

Author: Green, Lilli-Anne; and Australia Senate Select Committee on Wind Turbines

Ms Green: I am CEO of a healthcare consulting firm with a national reach in the United States. My company works in all sectors of the healthcare industry. One of the core competencies of the firm is to develop educational programs to help doctors, nurses and other healthcare workers to better communicate with their patients around the various disease states. Currently, as a volunteer in my town, I am secretary of our energy committee and a delegate to the Cape Cod National Seashore Advisory Commission as an alternate. Cape Cod National Seashore is part of the United States National Park Service. In the late 1970s, I built a passive solar superinsulated home. I directed an environmental education school for several years. I work seasonally as a naturalist interpretive ranger for the National Park Service. I have been interested and active in the environmental movement since the early seventies. Today, I speak as a private citizen.

CHAIR: Thank you. Could you please confirm that information on parliamentary privilege and the protection of witnesses and evidence has been provided to you?

Ms Green: It has.

CHAIR: Thank you. The committee has your submission and we now invite you to make a brief opening statement and at the conclusion of your remarks, I will invite members of the committee to put questions to you.

Ms Green: Thank you. Until the beginning of 2010, I believed wind turbines were good and green. My town was interested in constructing wind turbines and a friend visited my office in early March 2010 to provide my husband and business partner and me with new information. Following the visit, I spent the next 10 hours researching wind turbines. That very day, after concluding my research, I was saddened but I became convinced there was credible evidence that wind turbines cause adverse health impacts for some people who live nearby. In the past, over five years, I have learned it is a global phenomenon that wind turbines make some people who live nearby sick and it is a dose response so these people become more ill over time.

My husband, who is now deceased, and I travelled to Australia and New Zealand in 2010-11 and subsequently created a film called Pandora’s Pinwheels: The Reality of Living with Wind Turbines. We then travelled around the world in 2012 and conducted interviews in 15 different countries. Most of the people we interviewed expressed that they were in favour of wind energy prior to wind turbine construction nearby. There are some common symptoms people the world over report who live and work too close to wind turbines. A good summary is found in the book Wind Turbine Syndrome: A Report on a Natural Experiment by Nina Pierpont, MD, PhD.

It does not matter whether people live in English-speaking countries or in countries where people do not speak English. People reported to us they are made sick when they live too close to wind turbines, no matter what country they live in. We interviewed people in both English-speaking countries and non-English-speaking countries alike who reported to us they were not ill prior to wind turbine construction nearby and after the wind turbines were operational nearby they were made sick.

We interviewed people in five countries – France, Germany, Holland, Denmark and Sweden – who either needed an interpreter to speak with us or who spoke broken English. Some locations were quite rural with little or no internet connection. Still, the people we interviewed through interpreters expressed the same symptoms, others the world over described to us. These people with no or limited internet connection even used similar phrases, analogies and gestures, as others did globally to describe their symptoms. What we actually found is most people are reluctant to speak about their health problems.

In the United States, there are privacy laws regarding medical information. Culturally, people do not openly discuss their health problems with strangers. We found this to be the case in the countries we visited around the world. It was a brave person who opened up to us about their health problems. Usually, the people we interviewed expressed they wanted to help others. If anything, people tended to minimise their symptoms of try to attribute the symptoms to other circumstances. Even when they acknowledged a common symptom such as sleep deprivation, many people who experienced additional common symptoms were reluctant to attribute these other symptoms to the wind turbines nearby. Furthermore, people the world over reported that they and their healthcare providers puzzled over health problems that appeared after wind turbines were constructed near their homes.

Many endured a huge battery of medical tasks to try to determine what the cause of their health problems were. The medical tasks, at a huge cost to the healthcare system, only ruled out various diseases. Typically, the cause of their sickness was not diagnosed by their healthcare professional. Frequently, we heard that the patients would be in a social situation with others in their neighbourhood and eventually people they knew well confided they had similar health problems that recently appeared, or after research online about a different topic these people reported stumbling upon the cause of their health problems, which were the wind turbines constructed nearby.

We even interviewed people who lived for 11 years near wind turbines in a non-English speaking country – and that was in 2012. Several people came to an interview to talk about their property devaluation. It was only during the interviews when they heard others speak about health problems that the people realised they had been suffering because they lived too close to wind turbines. One man in his 80s sobbed during his interview. He had been visiting his doctor for 11 years trying to figure out what was wrong with his health.

The woman who invited us to interview her and her neighbours learned about health problems from wind turbines when she saw the film I produced Pandora’s Pinwheels, with interviews conducted in Australia and New Zealand, that was translated into her language. These people needed an interpreter; they did not speak English. She told me that her husband had passed away in the not too distant past due to heart problems. Before he died, he had complained quite frequently of common health symptoms people living near wind turbines experience. Although they visited their doctor frequently, no-one could figure out why he was so sick. She thanked us because, in seeing our film, it helped her to understand what her husband had been going through and why. It gave her closure that she did not have prior to viewing our film.

Another person at the interview told us she had to hold on to the walls of her house some days in order to walk from room to room and felt nauseous frequently. She knew she was unwell in her home and abandoned it. She did not know why until she saw our film. She came back to the area for the interview because she wanted to tell the world that wind turbines made her so ill that she sold her home at a huge loss.

One of the people I have known for the past five years lives in Falmouth, Massachusetts, which is very close to where I live – it is an hour and a half away. In 2010, he had recently retired to his dream home of many years. He was in great physical health, very fit and has over a 20-year record of normal to low to blood pressure. Since the wind turbines have been constructed in Falmouth, Massachusetts, he has reported that his blood pressure skyrockets to heart attack and stroke levels when the wind is coming in the wrong direction for him.

In Falmouth there are three wind turbines that are 1.65 megawatts near this person’s home. This person’s doctor, whom he has seen over the past 20 years, is in the Boston area and his doctor has been quite blunt. The doctor has told the patient that his life is in danger and he must move. Unfortunately, the Falmouth resident is crushed and cannot bear to leave his dream home at this point in time. He goes to other locations when the wind is predicted to be coming from the wrong direction. Others we interviewed in many different countries told us similar stories. Many reported they have abandoned their homes, sold their homes at a huge loss, purchased other homes to live in when the wind is coming from the wrong direction or in order to sleep in, and others spend time away from their homes at a huge and unexpected expense. People considered their homes as sanctuaries prior to the construction of wind turbines nearby. Now their opinion is not the same.

We have interviewed people on three continents who live more than five miles from the nearest wind turbine and are sick since wind turbine construction. I contend that we need honest research to determine how far wind turbines need to be sited from people in order to do no harm. People report to us that over time their symptoms become more severe. Many report not experiencing ill effects for some time following wind turbine construction, meanwhile their spouse became ill the day the wind turbines nearby became operational. They speak of thinking they were one of the lucky ones at first, but after a number of months or years they become as ill as their spouse. Not one person who stayed near wind turbines reported to us that they got used to it or got better; they all became more ill over time.

Since we are dealing with a dose response, we do not know over the projected lifetime of a wind turbine – say, 20 to 25 years – how far from people it is necessary to site wind turbines. To me, it is just wrong to knowingly harm the health and safety of people. There are responsible solutions to environmental issues that do not impact the health and safety of people nearby. Our humanity is in question when we continue to knowingly harm others. I thank you for your time today. I sincerely hope that you do take active steps to help the people in your country who are suffering due to living and working too close to wind turbines, and I am glad to answer questions you may have.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Senator LEYONHJELM: Good morning, Ms Green – I suppose it is not morning there. Thank you for your submission –

Ms Green: No, it is Sunday evening here.

Senator LEYONHJELM: Sunday evening? I am sorry to being interrupting your evening.

Ms Green: I am glad to speak with you.

Senator LEYONHJELM: You have interviewed people in 15 countries, I think you said, under all different circumstances and so on. I appreciate we are not pretending this is a gold-plated, statistical survey, but I am interested in your impressions because I think you have more experience of this than any other witness we have heard from. What do you think, based on your experience, are the common factors in the people you have interviewed in different communities living near wind turbines? What are the common factors to all of them?

Ms Green: I think we seriously do not have enough research to understand this problem fully. We saw the same symptoms. Slide 17 that I submitted has a listing of the common symptoms that Dr Pierpont lists in her book. I really believe that we just do not have enough information yet. But throughout the interviews, country by country, people described the same symptoms. Many times they used the same phrases to describe them and the same gestures – and they were not speaking English. There is a common thread here.

Senator LEYONHJELM: Do you get the impression that not everybody exposed to wind turbines is affected the same? Have you seen evidence of substantial individual variation?

Ms Green: I have, indeed. Just as some people are more prone to asthma and some people are more prone to lung cancer, let’s say, or any disease, we did see a variation. It appeared that if there were people who were, say, prone to migraine headaches, they were severely affected. But, again, there were people who did not seem to have the symptoms who were living either in the same house or nearby. I do not know whether it is a question of time, if over 20 years people become more sensitised and they will become sick. Very frequently we did hear the same theme running through the stories of the people we interviewed, where, say, the husband thought he was one of the lucky ones and six months later he could not sleep, he was experiencing ear pressure, ear pain and severe headaches or other symptoms.

Senator LEYONHJELM: We are aware of community groups in English-speaking countries who have expressed opposition to wind turbines, but we are not aware of that sort of phenomenon in non-English speaking countries. Have you encountered that?

Ms Green: Yes, indeed. We travelled around the world. It was a 10-year goal. We had it very well planned out and we thought it was for pleasure. But people kept emailing us and asking us to come and interview them. So we met people in a lot of non-English speaking countries, and they were such nice people, I have to say. They had just about any profession you would like to mention. They just wanted to tell their story. Many times these people wanted to talk to us for other reasons such as their house had been devalued because the wind turbines were nearby. As they were listening to other people in the room talking about their health problems, these people realised that they had been struggling with the same illness since the wind turbines were constructed nearby. They had never made that correlation before; in fact, they were quite frustrated. They told us that they would go back and back continually to their healthcare provider and talk about these symptoms, and they could not find a resolution or a reason. As I said, there is one man I recall quite vividly just sobbing – and that was in 2012; he was in his 80s. He had realised that since the wind turbines had been constructed nearby he was experiencing these symptoms that were the common symptoms.

Senator LEYONHJELM: Some witnesses have suggested to us that there is a relationship between not only the distance their residence is from the turbine but also the power of the turbine, the size of the turbine. Have you been able to come to any conclusions on that or is that outside your interest area?

Ms Green: No, it is not outside my interest area. In fact, it is quite alarming to me, because I have interviewed people who live near wind turbines that you in Australia would probably consider to be quite small and solitary – wind turbines that are 100 kilowatts, even – and they are experiencing health problems, even people living near a 10-kilowatt wind turbine. Frankly, it is the nearest wind turbine to where I live, and a number of neighbours are having problems, and not just with the audible noise but with the infrasound and low-frequency noise, based upon the symptoms they are reporting to me. It really is quite alarming. In my state, Massachusetts, there is a woman who has told me she lives more than five miles from the nearest wind turbine and she is quite ill. The onset of her symptoms was when the wind turbine was constructed. When she went on trips she was fine; when she came back she was ill, and it has only become worse over time. That wind turbine is not as powerful as wind turbines in Australia, and it is a solitary wind turbine.

Again, we travelled quite a distance in France – mid-south-eastern France – over a number of days at the invitation of the people in the area and visited several different communities where there were wind turbines. One of the situations is that the wind turbine is 10 kilometres from one of the neighbours who is very ill and 12 kilometres from the other neighbour. The person who lives 12 kilometres away reported to us that she had been very supportive of the wind turbines. She is very well known as an environmentalist in the area, has quite a reputation as an environmentalist and is highly regarded. But she is quite ill, and it was very difficult for her to speak with us.

The other person related a story of trying to detect what the problem was because he could not sleep and was becoming so frustrated that he would go in his car to try to find the source of what was keeping him awake. He talked about going night after night until he went into the wilderness. He could not imagine what was there, and then he found the wind turbines. They were creating a humming noise in his head at that point. He could actually hear this frequency. In our discussions with researchers, medical professionals and scientists, one of the scientists told us that what people hear is mostly a bell curve – that is the way it was described to us. Most people hear audible noise within a certain range, but there are people who are more sensitive to noise, and they hear sounds that most people would consider inaudible.

Senator URQUHART: I have a lot of questions. I am not going to get through them all, so I am wondering whether you are able to take some on notice at the end.

Ms Green: I will try. I am very busy, but I will try.

Senator URQUHART: In your submission you say you run a healthcare consultancy. Do you have any qualifications in health care or medicine?

Ms Green: I have a background in education.

Senator URQUHART: What is the name of your company?

Ms Green: I do not want that on the record.

Senator URQUHART: Can I ask why?

Ms Green: I am speaking today as a private citizen. I would be glad to give you that information if it is held as in-confidence.

Senator URQUHART: Okay. How many employees do you have?

Ms Green: My husband has passed away. He was my business partner, and I have scaled back the business. I am the only employee at this point in time. However, I will tell you that I have created in our company, with teams of people, educational programs that have been implemented throughout the United States. One of the oncology programs that was created by my team, which was quite a large team, interviewed over 100 oncology patients throughout the United States and numerous doctors and nurses and was mandatory for all of the nurses in the Kaiser health system in California.

Senator URQUHART: In your submission you say that 300,000 physicians have undertaken training through your company.

Ms Green: That is correct.

Senator URQUHART: What are the products or services? Is it communication? What is it that you actually sell?

Ms Green: There is a number of different core competencies in our company. One is developing educational programs around different disease states, such as oncology, diabetes, heart disease and various other disease states. Another path we have taken is to develop a service quality initiative. My husband was an extraordinary speaker and was often the keynote speaker for national conferences in all sectors of the healthcare industry.

Senator URQUHART: In your opening statement you talked about how you had interviewed many people from various countries. I could not find any of the transcripts, either in your submission or online. I am sorry if I have missed them.

Ms Green: You have not missed them. In the company we are still in the process of editing the films. It is a huge undertaking of many months, at huge expense. There is a lot of information that is still being edited.

Senator URQUHART: Are you able to provide copies of the transcripts and the full names of the people you interviewed?

Ms Green: No. It is on film; it is videotaped interviews, and the film is being edited.

Senator URQUHART: You talked about how you undertook the research after you had new information from people within your area who were concerned about wind farms. Was that the purpose of the interviews?

Ms Green: No. In my town, one month after we learned that our energy committee wanted to put a 1.65 wind turbine in our town – and we had conducted the research and people in our town were quite concerned – our board of selectmen, which is like your town councils, decided to not move forward with the project. I am on my energy committee, as secretary, and we are devising a plan to become 100 per cent electrical energy efficient without wind energy but using other alternative methods. Are you asking me what propels me to do the interviews?

Senator URQUHART: Yes. I guess my real reasoning was whether the purpose of the interviews was to inform the body of research on international attitudes to wind farms. Is that why –

Ms Green: No. It is not an attitude; it is to understand the realities of living near wind turbines – living, working, attending school, being incarcerated near wind turbines.

What happened was that my stepson was living in Australia and we went to Australia at the end of 2010. I knew there was a location called Waubra and I had seen the Dean report that had been recently published. I put out one little email asking ‘Do you happen to be in the Melbourne area and is it possible to meet some of the people that are living near the wind turbines at Waubra? Is it possible to see the Waubra area?’

It was amazing that I was connected with the people in that area of Australia. My husband and I drove to the area and we interviewed over 17 people in one day. They welcomed us into their homes. We did not know what to expect. We turned the camera on and we asked them questions, and they told us their story. We had no idea what we were going to find. We went to New Zealand and people emailed us after they had heard we had been to Waubra. They asked us if we would come and visit them and interview them. We did that in two different locations in New Zealand. When we came home we put together this film called Pandora’s Pinwheels –

Senator URQUHART: You interviewed people –

Ms Green: We just thought we would go back to Waubra and talk to the people at Waubra because we had been emailing them over the year. People around the world kept on emailing us and asking us to come and interview them.

Senator URQUHART: So you conducted interviews in 15 countries, as I understand it from your submission. Is that how you got the contact information on the people you interviewed?

Ms Green: I do not understand your question. Everywhere we were travelling people kept on emailing us and contacting us and asking if we would come and interview them and talk with them. They wanted to go on camera and tell their story. We had no agenda; we had no plan. We work in the healthcare industry; we talk about various illnesses and disease states, and we educate doctors and nurses about disease states. I am sorry; I want to retract that: we find a cross-section where patients are having issues with the communication around their disease state, and the doctors and nurses are having issues around communicating with their patients. We find those intersections and help doctors and nurses better communicate with the patients. So we are trying to improve patient care. That is what we do as one of the core competencies of our business.

When we found the health problems with the wind turbines and when we saw in every country we visited that people were saying the same thing, we wanted to get that word out to people like you who are hearing from your constituents that they are having health problems. That is all I want to do – to provide you with the truth.

Senator DAY: Ms Green, as you might imagine, we have received submissions from hundreds of people who have reported adverse health impacts and yet we are being accused of trying to destroy the wind industry. We are being accused of rigging this inquiry and of being engaged in a political stitch up. What has been your experience with such hostility towards genuine inquiry?

Ms Green: I really do not have a response for you, Senator. I have heard a lot of stories from people and I have experiences myself, but I really do not have a response on that topic.

Senator DAY: Okay. I will follow up then: you say that a number of governments around the world are realising there is a need for more or better regulation surrounding the wind energy industry. Which governments are doing better in this area, in your opinion?

Ms Green: I know that in my state, I have a new governor and my governor has a background in health care, and I am expecting that my governor understands that people do have health problems when they live and work too close to wind turbines in my state.

Senator BACK: Ms Green, I have just one quick question; I know that we are over time. In Australia, we are proceeding to have independent medical research undertaken for the first time. One of the proposals put to us is that they try and simulate this effect of either noise or infrasound, and do so in a one-off exposure in a clinically sterile circumstance for exposure times of somewhere between 10 to 30 minutes and an hour. From what you have learned and heard – and from interviewing people – do you think there would be anything to be learned in exposing somebody for a very limited period of time, and once only, in a sort of laboratory-type circumstance? Do you believe that is likely to lead to any reasonable outcome or result that we might be able to use?

Ms Green: Senator, I am not a researcher or a doctor. But given what I have heard from people and what people have reported to me, I find it highly unlikely that that would have any results that would have any validity.

Senator BACK: Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you for evidence today to the committee, Ms Green. You will receive questions on notice and if you are able to come back to us with answers to those, that would be appreciated.

Ms Green: Absolutely. I would like to thank the committee; the chair, Senator Madigan, and the members of the committee, and also to thank you, Graham.

CHAIR: Thank you, Ms Green.

—GREEN, Ms Lilli-Anne, Private capacity
Monday, 29 June 2015, Sydney

Submission to the Senate Select Committee on Wind Turbines

Date added: August 17, 2011
France, Wildlife •

Etude de la mortalité des chiroptères

Author: AVES Environnement

Parc éolien du Mas de Leuze Saint-Martin-de-Crau (nine 800-kW turbines, 48-m-diam blade area [1,810 m², 0.45 acre], 50 m hub ht)

103 chauves-souris ont été trouvées mortes ou blessées (2 individus) au cours des 56 contrôles réalisés, entre le 17 mars et le 27 novembre 2009, sous les neuf éoliennes du parc du Mas de Leuze.

D’après la formule adaptée de celle préconisée par Erickson et al. (2000), le nombre effectif de victimes, calculée sur la base des 103 chauves-souris trouvées entre le 17 mars et le 27 novembre 2009 et en tenant compte des différents facteurs de correction, est estimé à 714 chauves-souris (tableau 5), ce qui correspond à un taux de mortalité de 79,3 individus par éolienne et par an.

(79.3 bats killed per turbine per year)

Etude de la mortalité des chiroptères

Earlier Documents »

Click here to send in ordinances, contracts, research, testimony, presentations, etc.
Or see Contact page for more anonymous options.