[ posts only (not attachments) ]

ISSUES/LOCATIONS

View titles only
(by date)
List all documents, ordered…

By Title

By Author

View PDF, DOC, PPT, and XLS files on line
RSS

Add NWW documents to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

News Watch

Selected Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Resource Documents: France (16 items)

RSSFrance

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.


Changes in Wind Turbine Setbacks

Author:  Palmer, William

Note that Setbacks can have both physical safety rationale – for reasons of potential injury – and noise rationale – for reasons of annoyance and health effects

United Kingdom

Derek Taylor, 1991, “How to Plan the Nuisance Out of Wind Energy”, suggested setback from wind turbines with a 30 metre rotor to roadways and lot lines, of 50 metres adequate to a lightly traveled road, 100 metres to a heavily traveled road, and 120 to 170 metres to a home [4-5.7 times rotor diameter].

UK Noise Association, 2006, states, “It would be prudent that no wind turbine should be sited closer than 1 mile (1600 metres) from the nearest dwellings … Wind farms should only be located in areas where the “swish, swish, swish” of the turbines will not cause noise problems for people.”

United Kingdom – Scotland

From the limits identified above …

Scottish Planning Policy SPP6 – Renewable Energy (2007) … When considering spatial policies, planning authorities may consider it helpful to introduce zones around communities as a means of guiding developments to broad areas of search where visual impacts are likely to be less of a constraint. PAN 45 confirms that development up to 2 km is likely to be a prominent feature in an open landscape. The Scottish Ministers would support this as a separation distance between turbines and the edge of cities, towns and villages …

France

From no limits for safety setbacks …

Original setbacks were that noise at night should not exceed 3 dBA above background sound at night (background may be 25 to 30 dBA at night in rural areas)

Administrative Court of Appeal, Lyon, April 2006, determined a “zone of protection of 500 metres” from wind turbines to areas where people can be.

Academy of Medicine, March 2006, recommended a setback of 1500 metres from wind turbines to homes until an epidemiological study could be carried out to determine health effects.

Nova Scotia

Pubnico Point Wind Farm – No standard resulted in setback from turbine to home of 370 metres, and sound up to 13 dbA above the Ontario limit of 40 dBA.

Glen Dhu Wind Farm, October 2008, established setbacks of 1200 metres from homes of participating residents, and 1440 metres from non-participating residences.

Safe setbacks: How far should wind turbines be from homes?

In 2000 used sound limits with a rising limit as ground level wind speed rose. Limit was 40 dBA at 1 m/s and increased to 50 dBA at 12m/s.

(Ontario used this as a model to develop its sound limits, although Ontario limits allowed 53 dBA at 12 m/s, and continue to allow 51 dBA at 11 m/s even after revision).

In 2007, the Netherlands changed to a fixed upper limit for wind turbine sound of 40 dBA – recognizing the change in wind profile at night. The Netherlands is currently investigating a new monitoring method based on Lden. This is a rating of community noise exposure that differentiates between daytime, evening and nighttime noise exposure, and penalizes nighttime noise.

Germany

Rural noise from wind turbines is limited to 35 dBA at night.

Compare Ontario’s 51 dBA nighttime limit and Germany’s 35 dBA limit -note that every 6 dBA (e.g. 35 vs 41 dBA) difference means the turbines in Germany will be twice as far away as in Ontario – a 12 dBA difference (e,g, 35 vs 47 dBA) means they are 4 times further away in Germany than Ontario.

Sweden

Limits noise to 35 dBA in recreational areas in evening and at night, and to 40 dBA in residential areas at night. The measurement must be done with 10 metre wind speeds of 8 m/s. Ontario regulations permit 45 dBA at 8 m/sec.

European Union

Within the European Union the Commission has made a proposal for common noise immission level descriptions and evaluation methods. It is primarily intended for traffic noise but can be expanded to include other areas, such as wind power noise. It suggests an equivalent annual average sound level (Lden) where the night level has a penalty of 10 dBA and the evening level of 5 dBA. The day is in this case is 12 hours, the evening 4 hours and the night 8 hours.

New Zealand

NTS6808:1998, “The Assessment and Measurement of Sound From Wind Turbines”, requires the calculation of a background noise level prior to construction of a wind farm. NTS68001:1991 limits sound from all activity except wind turbines to 35 dBA from 8:00 PM to 7:00 AM. NTS6808 limits sound from wind turbines to 40 dBA or 5dBA over background sound. Sounds with a “special audible characteristic” (clearly audible tones, impulses, or modulation of sound level) shall have a 5 dBA penalty.

The Environmental Court of New Zealand issued a decision July 20, 2007, that required that when the background sound conditions are at 25 dBA or less, the noise from a wind farm shall not exceed 35 dBA at any dwelling as an absolute limit.

Sound levels in rural Ontario are typically less than 35 dBA at night. Yet, Ontario continues to have guidelines that allow up to 51 dBA, and rejects applying a penalty for cyclic noise as New Zealand does.

Hydro One, System Networks

2005 to Dec 2007 – setback of overall height of turbine (tower plus blade radius) to edge of right of way. Dec 2007 to July 2008 – increased setback to greater of 150 metres or overall height of turbine.

As of July 2008 increased setbacks to edge of right of way for 500 kV assets (critical assets) of 500 metres, to 230 kV (redundant assets) of 250 metres, and to 115 kV assets (for which loss tends to be an inconvenience but not a significant one) of 150 metres.

CanWEA, Proposed By-Laws for Rural Municipalities in Ontario

Recommends setbacks to lot lines of non-participating property, road right of ways, or non residential buildings on a participating property need not exceed blade length plus 10 metres (typically 51 metres)

Recommends setbacks to residential buildings should not be less than 200 metres (or as required to meet MOE CofA requirements)

Interesting to compare the 51 metres that CanWEA reconnnds to protect the lives of people, compared to the 500 metre safety setback that Hydro One calls for to protect its critical assets.

From this should one conclude that the lives of people do not matter as much as a hydro line?

Download original document: “Changes in Wind Turbine Setbacks

Bookmark and Share


Date added:  December 24, 2008
Economics, Emissions, Environment, France, General, Regulations, VideosPrint storyE-mail story

Éolien industriel: Apothéose du scandale

Author:  Fédération Environnement Durable

Click to play.

Bookmark and Share


Date added:  July 27, 2008
France, GeneralPrint storyE-mail story

Industrial Wind Energy in France

Author:  Bonn, Pierre

Pierre Bonn is President of l’Association de Défense de l’Environnement en Nord Lauragais

Industrial wind energy is an environmental imposter that increases global warming emissions. The imposture is worsened by ripping off French consumers.

In effect, not only does it not reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but the more wind energy, the more need for thermal plants that emit greenhouse gases.

Contents
1. Industrial wind energy is not able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
2. Industrial wind energy must be balanced by fossil fuel–fired plants.
3. Why are there advocates of industrial wind energy, and what motivates them?
4. The racket in France.
5. Orders of magnitude of the scam.
6. The promoters want even more profit.
7. Wind energy and permanent employment.
8. Other nuisances.
9. Politics.
10. Annexes.

Telecharger «L’eolien industriel en France»

Bookmark and Share


Date added:  July 2, 2008
France, WildlifePrint storyE-mail story

Evaluation de l’impact du parc éolien de Bouin (Vendée) sur l’avifaune et les chauves-souris

Author:  Ligue pour la Protection des Oiseaux

“Evaluation of the impact of the Bouin (Vendée) wind energy facility on birds and bats”, by the Bird Protection League (France) Perrine Dulac, editor

Pour un sommaire français, voir à Fédération Environnement Durable (cliquer).

English summary by Mark Duchamp:

A five-year monitoring report of 8 wind turbines near the coast in Vendée, France, by the French ornithological society LPO (Ligue pour la Protection des Oiseaux), discloses the following:

bird mortality: 5.7 to 33.8 per turbine/year, depending upon the year and the estimation method. It is estimated that 20% were migrating birds.

bat mortality: 6.0 to 26.7 per turbine/year, depending upon the year and the estimation method. It is thought that many of them were migrating. The bats showed no external injury. But the autopsies revealed that their internal organs had been destroyed, possibly as a result of high air pressure created by the blades. This is what we learn from the abstract and from an enclosing email from FED, which reports the words of a researcher 4 years ago at an ornithology meeting in the region (body imploded, internal organs destroyed):

“Il y a 4 ans, un chercheur aux journées internationales de l’avifaune à Menigoute dans les Deux Sevres avait dit: ‘lorsque l’on dissèquent ces cadavres, on dirait qu’ils ont implosés, l’aspect exterieur est intact et ce sont les organes internes qui ont été détruits’.”

Télécharger/Download “Evaluation de l’impact du parc éolien de Bouin (Vendée) sur l’avifaune et les chauves-souris”

Bookmark and Share


« Later DocumentsHomeEarlier Documents »

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook

Share

CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.
Share

 Follow: