We just celebrated beginning of the year 2012; it will be an eventful one and a difficult one as well because rural Ontarians have to defend their land from construction of the provincial government sponsored wind turbines which will turn the province into an industrial service corridor.
Here is a very simple, abbreviated reminder of what we will be dealing with.
Wind turbines, solar farms – fashion of the day, symbols of green and sustainable development. They are supposed to, magically, reduce CO2 emission (zero carbon?), keep global temperatures down, lower sea levels, and save polar bears from extinction – will they?
Each wind turbine requires 14 meters ( 30 feet ) deep foundation of 1000 metric tons of poured in concrete. To produce concrete, the limestone has to be heated to 2,600 degrees Fahrenheit using fossil fuels; to produce 1 ton of cement nearly
1 ton of carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere where it traps heat, contributing to global warming. So each foundation is responsible for release of
1000 tons of CO2. Being so deep, some of them might affect ground water.
In addition to cement there is steel (335 tons), production of which generates vast amount of CO2 as well. There is copper (4.7 tons), mining of which pollutes water;
3 tons of aluminum (very high energy output for production); 2 tons of rare earth materials extraction of which creates enormous toxic and radioactive waste.
The footprint on the Earth in terms of energy use for installation and operation of each turbine is 20 years while the lifespan of one turbine is 20 years as well.
Approximately 170 m tall IWTs (Industrial Wind Turbines) produce power intermittently, often not at all, and rarely above 20% of the rated capacity. Therefore, fossil fuels back-up power stations are needed to avoid brown-outs. In Europe, where wind farms exist for quite a few years, the CO2 emission went up 2%.
Each turbine requires 400 – 500 gallons of oil per year for maintenance. Oil spills and pollutes ground water.
There are access roads, masts, pylons and wires; all construction done by diesel guzzling heavy machinery.
10,000 turbines are planned for the province of Ontario.
There were cases when IWTs collapsed sending debris long distance, all over the landscape. They also catch fire which has to be let burn down since the firefighters do not have ladders long enough … What will happen in case of hurricane or tornado?
Most of the existing and proposed wind farms are or will be located in the world’s wildest, most beautiful and most untouched landscapes – deserts, moors, mountain tops and uplands, where the roads have to be built which means clear cutting large forest areas and destroying the environment. They are also located near bird sanctuaries and on migratory bird routes. Birds are being shredded by thousands by those enormous blades. The latest in the USA: the Federal government is proposing to grant a permit that would allow the developer of a central Oregon wind-power project to legally kill protected golden eagles (ironically, symbol of the country)
Wherever the IWTs are, most of the wildlife is gone and there are not that many places left where the remaining animals could survive.
They are located in the oceans, lakes and rivers.
They are located in rural areas, right next to the houses.
People living in the vicinity of turbines complain of serious health problems but so far nobody, nowhere conducted thorough health studies to this effect.
Many worry about 40% – 50% property value drop in the areas of turbines; very often, those properties are all they have, lifetime investment…
The wind farms have really nothing to do with saving this Planet. It is a huge and profitable business, for the time being. Transalta (Alberta Tar Sands) is the largest owner and operator of IWTs in Canada; developers of nuclear power plants (Nextera, Samsung, Iberdrola, Exelon, First Energy, NRG, Xcel) are big players in the wind turbines plants and use government subsidies allocated for “wind development” to reduce their taxes.
As mentioned before – the lifespan of a turbine in 20 years, then what? Removal of a single, above the ground structure would cost $250,000 in today’s dollars – who will pay? They will be most probably abandoned, some of them already are.
The blades are not recyclable and will remain at the site or in landfills for ever (Denmark is having a serious problem with decommissioned turbines). Concrete foundations will never be removed.
“.. arguments for industrial-scale wind power can sound similar to those used by companies drilling for natural gas: America needs the energy, it’s domestically produced, and it’s cleaner than many alternatives.”… Erin Ailworth, Globe Staff | The Boston Globe | August 11, 2013 | www.bostonglobe.com ~~
“On the other side of Lowell Mountain, on the Farm Road, one such neighbor arrived home from his overseas job late last week.
“At approximately 3 on the morning of November 25 I along with four of my house guests were woken by thumping noise that lasted for over two hours coming from the wind turbines behind my home,” Kevin McGrath wrote in an e-mail to Susan Paruch, a consumer affairs specialist at the state Department of Public Service.
“The noise was similar to a heavy object rotating in a clothes dryer,” Mr. McGrath wrote. “Later on that morning at about 10 the noise levels penetrated my home and sounded like a waterfall gushing directly behind my home.”.. One of several noise complaints about the new operating Lowell Mountain project in Vermont, a project that saw complete hilltops blasted off in order to support the concrete bases. The project incurred great protests by environmentalists – several who were arrested and jailed. … complete news article can be found here..http://bartonchronicle.com/
A view of the recently constructed Lowell Mountain project … and seems to be the destiny of the rolling hills in this area.
August 3, 2013 • England
Couple told: “Wind turbines won’t be a problem if you grow a 17-feet high hedge”
Credit: By Ruth Lawson-JOU | 3 August 2013 | The Journal | www.thejournal.co.uk ~~
A couple fighting plans for a wind farm near their rural home have been told they can avoid having to look at the massive turbines – by growing a 17ft-high hedge around their property.
Martin and Sarah Shotton – who enjoy panoramic views out towards the coastline from their isolated Northumberland cottage – were left dumbfounded by the suggestion on how they can hide the machines from view.
The idea has been put forward as part of evidence submitted on behalf of green energy company Energiekontor UK to an imminent public inquiry.
Mr and Mrs Shotton are among many local people who are opposing the firm’s bid to build five, 126-metre-high turbines on farmland between their home, near Longhorsley, and the neighbouring hamlet of Fenrother.
Planning permission was refused by the county council earlier this year after the scheme sparked more than 1,600 letters of protest.
Energiekontor appealed against the decision and a six-day public inquiry will be held in Morpeth later this month. In evidence submitted to the inquiry by architects on behalf of the company, Mr and Mrs Shotton’s Moor Edge Cottage, next to the A697, is said to have direct views towards the proposed turbines.
The document says that if a conifer hedgerow, which has been planted around the boundary of their garden, was allowed to grow to 5.4 metres (17ft 7ins) it would “screen all views of the turbines”.
It also says further tree planting near the boundary of their garden or closer to the house would help to protect views – but they would have to wait eight years for them to grow high enough.
The couple, who live with their sons James, 21, and William, 15, have joined with another local wind farm opponent to criticise the statements.
Mr Shotton, 48, who runs his own building company, said: “I think this is totally outrageous and absolutely farcical. It shows that Energiekontor are clutching at straws.
“Our hedge was planted three years ago, and is currently less than a metre high. They are suggesting we let it grow to 5.4m, which is higher than some prison walls. We would feel like prison inmates with a hedge that high.
“We live in the countryside and we bought the property partly because of the views. This would completely ruin them.”
Dr James Lunn, who lives in Fenrother and heads the local action group opposing the wind farm scheme, added: “This is one of the most disingenuous statements I have ever come across in a wind farm application, and is a great insult to local people.
“We accept there is no fundamental right to a view but people do have a right to light, and should be able to enjoy their property in the way it has been designed.
“It is a mark of Energiekontor’s desperation and arrogance that a suggestion like this is even made.”
But Energiekontor project manager Sam Dewar claimed the architects’ submission to the inquiry was being misinterpreted.
“We still believe that our environmental impact assessment, as submitted to the planning authority in August 2012, demonstrates that the relationship between this property and the proposed wind farm would be acceptable, even as things stand now.
“The extra evidence which has been submitted to the inquiry basically states that if the existing hedgerow were to be allowed to continue growing, and exceed 5.4 metres in height, then all views to the wind farm would be screened.
“This is a matter of fact, rather than a suggestion or request, and is up to the residents involved.”
Source: By Ruth Lawson-JOU | 3 August 2013 | The Journal | www.thejournal.co.uk
August 9, 2013 • Oregon
Eastern Oregon resident sues over Willow Creek wind project noise level
Credit: By Helen Jung, The Oregonian | August 09, 2013 | www.oregonlive.com ~~
A Morrow County man is seeking $10 million in damages from a wind-energy company, alleging that it has operated a wind-turbine project consistently above permissible noise levels set by the state for more than four years.
The noise from Invenergy’s Willow Creek project has caused physical and emotional distress for Daniel Brian Williams, as well as interrupted his sleep and reduced the value of his property, the federal complaint filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Pendleton alleges. The noise eventually drove out Williams who moved last year from the 209-acre ranch near Heppner where he has lived since 1997, according to a press release from his law firm.
“Invenergy came into this valley with little consideration for folks like me who were already living here,” said Williams in the press release. “The turbines they built are noisy and the effects on me have been devastating. I treasured the peaceful, quiet existence at my home.”
Invenergy did not immediately return a message seeking comment.
The concerns over the project’s noise date back to 2008 when Invenergy began building its 48-turbine project, according to the complaint. The wind farm started operating in December 2008.
Neighbors including Williams started complaining about the noise levels the following month, according to the lawsuit. Invenergy’s own consultant established that the noise levels were above Oregon’s allowances, the complaint states, but Williams argues that the Chicago-based company’s proposed solutions have been inadequate and are untested.
Despite findings by the local county commission and land-use appeals panels that established the wind farm was exceeding permissible noise levels, however, officials have done nothing to curb the project’s operations, the complaint contends, forcing Williams to file the lawsuit.
Source: By Helen Jung, The Oregonian | August 09, 2013 |www.oregonlive.com
Tears in county hall over turbine impact
Credit: Leinster Express | 7 August 2013 | www.leinsterexpress.ie ~~
A Roscommon man broke down in tears in the Council Chambers, last week, as he claimed his health had been destroyed by two turbines just 700 metres from his home.
Mr Keane received a standing ovation from councillors and members of the Laois Wind Energy Group who had gathered in the public gallery after he pleaded with the council not to give planners a free hand.
“Would you build a 100 metre high turbine 250 metres from your front door, then why would you allow it to happen to someone else,” he said.
Mr Keane and his wife, Dorothy, moved to Roscommon in 2004 to retire in a rural and peaceful location. In 2011 a wind farm was built and commissioned on a hill facing their house.
They had not objected or made a submission to An Bord Pleanala as they thought the worst would be having to look at them.
But the effect of the noise on the Keane’s has been chronic stress, sleep depravation and anxiety which were disgnosed by a consultant psychiatrist in their local hospital, who has told them the only long term solution is to leave their home.
They are now on a cocktail of medications such as sleeping tablets and two anti depressants for the short term.
Mr Keane broke down as he told the councillors that they would be leaving their home, which is now worth nothing, next month.
“At the age of 65 we have been evicted by a windfarm, we have been evicted and let down by our Government, we have been let down by the ineffectual guidlines.
“The windfarm that brought us to our kness has two turbines 100 metres tall, 700 metres from our home.
“If two people can be brought to their knees, how many people will be in our situtation if 2,500 turbines are built in the Midlands,” he said.
Mr Keane spoke as part of a presentation by members of the Laois Wind Energy Group, who said they did not want to be in his position in two years time.
Source: Leinster Express | 7 August 2013 | www.leinsterexpress.ie
A couple on NEW websites have been launched…
This website based in Australia is a one-stop destination for information on the health impacts caused by giant industrial wind turbines, including sleep deprivation and other recognized adverse health problems. It carries the latest research being carried out worldwide on turbine noise, sleep and health issues. This is a useful site for those that are new to the issue as wind projects expand and critical for authorities to utilize so as to avoid planning disasters.
The other new Canadian website is called The Human Face of Wind Turbines..
Russell and Debbie cope with the health effects by leaving their farm…
Donna and Paul have touched door knobs and been thrown backwards onto the floor…
Shawn and Kim lost their farm and now live in a rental property in town…
Jim and Ida. His doctor prescribed sleeping pills but they soon wore off…
Jessie and Dave. They and their children have frequent headaches and are always tired…
Jack and Denise. Their cattle’s milk production decreased…
Rilla and Jake. Jake spends time in his cellar to avoid nausea and vomiting…
Kirk and Anne. Kirk has ringing in his ears and chest tension. Anne is sleep-deprived…
Mary suffers from insomnia, headaches, ringing and pain in her ears…
Louise could barely carry on and had to quit her job…
John and Lisa experience coughing and choking when trying to sleep…
Marjorie and Len have tinnitus, migraines, and blood pressure problems…
Mike has headaches, tinnitus, stomach upset, and decreased ability to tolerate pain…
Christine and Joe. Christine has pulsing in her head and tingling in her head and face…
Mark and Kim can’t sleep because their home vibrates…
Sharon and Ken have stopped using some rooms in their home…
Curtis and Jane experience nuisance stress from the shadow flicker and red night lights…
Susan and Gordon. Gordon has vertigo, sleep deprivation, and blurred vision…
Gerry and Liz. Liz was told not to walk her dog close to the fence line on her property…
Joyce and Dan suffer from electrical sensitivity which makes them feel sick
In the United States, the idea that large scale solar and wind projects are best suited to be built the tens of thousands of contaminated sites instead of in pristine wilderness areas and the rural countryside is taking hold:
It’s About Water.