LOCATION/TYPE

NEWS HOME



[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]

Archive
RSS

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

WHAT TO DO
when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates
RSS

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Windmill safety issues extend beyond turbine height 

After reading last week’s editorial about Manchester’s proposed windmill bylaw, I became curious. How did turbine height become the most important measurement for setbacks?

At first glance, it doesn’t seem unreasonable. The model zoning bylaw from the Mass. Division of Energy Resources includes guidance for such a condition (presumably in case the tower falls over).

But what is the goal of setbacks in the first place? Safety? If safety of abutters is a goal, then a critical measurement to use is the “fling” or “throw” distance. A Business Week article last August cited a number of instances of blade pieces ripping off and landing several hundreds of feet away from the turbines. Isn’t it more likely for a blade tip to tear off in gusty winds, or to have built-up ice flung off a blade and hit someone in the head, than a falling tower?

The throw distance can be calculated from the blade length and the rotation speed (rpm) at which the blades turn, using formulas found in a high school physics textbook. For a turbine with blade length of 50 feet, rotating at 20 rpm (about one revolution every three seconds), the throw distance is about 342 feet. The speed of the piece would be more than 72 mph. And as the rotor rotation speed increases, the throw distance increases exponentially.

Imagine walking your dog only 300 feet away and being struck by a torn-off piece of blade going 72 miles per hour.

Maybe the club’s general manager should count his blessings that the proposed bylaw is focused on turbine height.

LEE ANNE KOWALSKI

Bellevue Avenue, Gloucester

Gloucester Daily Times

10 March 2008

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational 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. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)

Share:

e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share


News Watch Home

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

 Follow:

Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky