Thursday, December 20, 2007

still no news

Frustration abounds as we continue to hold our breath waiting for NSPI to make some kind of announcement as to which projects have been accepted.

There has been no update on the NSPI site since December 5th. http://oasis.nspower.ca/documents/GIP_Queue_009.pdf

This is hard on all invovled:

  • There are property owners who have plans to sell, buy, build, expand or renovate on hold.
  • There are landowners who have signed leases to wind energy companies who do not know if they have this nice income to look forward to (generally $4,000 per turbine) or, alternatively, if they can accept other purchase or development deals on offer.
  • There are Municipalities who stand to gain from taxes ($5,500 per mega watt) who would like to work on future budgets.
  • And we mustn't forget the wind energy companies who must have their projects online for NSPI by the end of '09. The demand for turbines (from Denmark or Germany) is so backed up, that they stand to have to wait 1-2 years for an order to be filled, which is leaving things pretty tight for time.
The only news, which came about a month ago, is that letters of acceptance have been sent to six companies for eight projects. Therefore, most probably, there are two companies that have successfully been awarded two projects each. Mathematically, one company could have been awarded three projects, but that is unlikely.

There are a lot of people keeping mum over last minute wheeling and dealing. Corporate lawyers on both sides are attempting to sweeten the deal for their clients. Larger companies, with projects pending elsewhere and bigger investment companies funding their projects, can afford to take the risk and order their turbines. Smaller companies (again disadvantaged by the way this whole system is set up) don't dare take that same risk.

In the meanwhile, the rest of us scurry around getting ready for Christmas and hope for the best. Perhaps by the New Year we will have a better idea of what is going on.

Merry Christmas everyone.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Whites Point quarry rejected

Press release from Dept of Envmt and Labour:

Environment and Labour Minister Mark Parent is rejecting the proposed Whites Point quarry in Digby County.

An independent panel report says the quarry project poses unacceptable risk to the environment and the community.

Mr. Parent says he agrees with the conclusion. Other recommendations will be reviewed and shared with appropriate departments.

The Environment Act allows the minister to reject such proposals.

~~~~~~~~~

The people spoke to the federal and provincial panel, who recommended the project be rejected, and it was.

Nice to see that common sense has prevailed. Let's hope that it is a growing trend.

http://www.gov.ns.ca/news/details.asp?id=20071120003

Monday, November 19, 2007

Country Guardian

Country Guardian http://www.countryguardian.net/ is "is a UK conservation group which, since 1991, has campaigned against the construction of wind turbines in environmentally sensitive areas. We object because wind turbines convert rural landscape into industrial landscape, and because they are a poor source of renewable energy."

That being said, there is some good information to be had on their web site, particularly their 54 page "The case against windfarms" file by independent consultant, Dr John Etherington. It is a good all round "starter kit" on basic information to do with wind energy. The references are primarily British, but the principals remain the same, wherever you are.

The direct .pdf address link does not seem to work. Go to http://www.countryguardian.net/Case%20document.htm
and click on "click to download the ADOBE version...."

You can get there from the home page too.

Sunday, November 18, 2007

France moves turbines back

Sarkozy announces new wind turbine policy

Industrial wind turbine development to end in rural and wild areas.

The Sustainable Environment Federation (FED), with the heritage and countryside associations who demonstrated in Paris on October 6 against industrial wind energy, are pleased by President Sarkozy’s redirection of French policy concerning wind turbines and renewable energy.

In his comments at the closure of the « Grenelle de l’environnement », the president of the republic announced the end of the « rush » that has characterized French policy on wind turbines up to now and that ultimately means degradation of the environment. New wind turbines will be installed first in brownfields and far from emblematic locales.

In an improvisation that was not in the prepared text provided to the press, M. Sarkozy turned to José-Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, and added : « Frankly, when I see some European countries, it doesn’t make me envious ».

The president of the republic also announced acceleration of research into energies of the future.

This new policy marks the end of industrial wind turbine installations in rural and wild areas. This is a relief for the 800 villages and 52 departments represented in the October 6 demonstration. It is also a powerful contribution to the image of France and shows Europe that an energy policy can reconcile the fight against global warming and respect for the countryside and every life.

*******

The 1500 demonstrators on October 6 brought six demands. Many of them have been accepted : publicize the true numbers of wind energy development (M. Borloo [environment minister] has committed to this), protect public health from wind turbine nuisance, protect the cultural and natural heritage of France, restore peace in the villages, commit to an effective energy strategy.

The sixth concerns the financial scandal of the price of wind-generated electricity. The highly elevated price encourages the production of intermittent energy which does not promote the reduction of greenhouse gases. It will lead to speculative pressure for the few areas in France that meet the criteria of the new policy.

Just as the president announced that the policy of supporting biofuels will be reviewed, price support for wind turbines needs to be reviewed.

http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/11/06/sarkozy-announces-new-wind-turbine-policy/

~~~~~~~~~


"Brownfields" are areas zoned specifically for industrial farming use only. No wind turbines in residential areas or forests.

~~~~~~~~~

If your French is up to it, here's the link to Sarkozy's entire speech:

http://environnementdurable.net/documents/html/grenelle-sarkozy.htm

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Another site

While away the hours waiting for news from NSPI at this interesting site.

http://windfarms.wordpress.com/


I will work at permanently posting links to other interesting sites here.

Saturday, November 10, 2007

no news from NSPI

The latest "information" on the NSPI site http://oasis.nspower.ca/documents/GIP_Queue_003.pdf is exactly the same as last week's.

Monday, November 5, 2007

Higgins Mountain

Just got home from a meeting at the Wentworth Fire Hall where there was a presentation, to about 40 people, about the Higgins Mountain project. The presentation was the same as what was recently given to the Folly Lake Residents Association (or similar named group) by one of the long time seasonal residents. He made a very good job of presenting the project, process, pros and cons in as balanced a manner as one could expect.

It would seem the folk of Wentworth/Westchester/Folly Lake are not of such fulsome praise of this project as we have been led to believe.

Again, the cry is all for wind power, but the one of the main concerns is of "siting". The turbines for this project are not neatly tucked away out of sight as we have been told, but march along the top of the ridge and sometimes quite close to Highway 4.

Modeling of shadow flicker for Ski Wentworth present a (potentially dangerous) degree of flicker.

The local people asked many intelligent questions. There was a rep from CBCL who answered many questions. MLAs Murray Scott and Karen Casey were there, as was Councilor Kathy Redmond, a councilor from Colchester County, reps from CREDA and other local Associations (for once I didn't have my note book with me - sorry). No media.

I came home to an e-mail claiming we should hear from NSPI tomorrow.


Saturday, October 27, 2007

IRQ latest

The most recent IRQ http://oasis.nspower.ca/documents/QUEUE_Oct25_2007_000.pdf now posts the Pugwash site status as "Impact Study Agrmnt tendered by customer"

All sites below Pugwash on the list have the same status as Pugwash with the exceptions of:
  • Higgins Mountain (Feasibility study complete)
  • 70MW Cumberland County (Interconnection request valid)
  • 10MW Richmond County (Feasibility study in progress)
  • 50MW Halifax - steam turbine (Interconnection request valid)
#79 in Antigonish has dropped off the list.

The six projects ahead of Pugwash are variously listed as "generator interconnection agreement tender" (#8 Guysborough), "Impact/optional study in progress"or "feasibility study complete".


Tuesday, October 23, 2007

NS Power - Interconnection Request Queue

We are still waiting for an announcement from Nova Scotia Power Inc (NSPI) as to whose applications towards their Request for Proposals (RFP) have been accepted. This morning I finally got a direct response from NSPI simply saying they do not "have any further information to provide at this time, as the formal evaluation process is not yet complete".

However, after fixing a computer glitch, I have found some interesting information from their most recent Interconnection Request Queue (IRQ).

There have been some changes since I started printing off current IRQs, which I now see appear to be updated every two weeks or so. So far, I do not see where older reports are archived.

I was given copies for March 30th and May 7th and, since finding the correct site, now have reports dated Sept 19th, Sept 27th and Oct 16th (http://oasis.nspower.ca/documents/QUEUE_Oct16_2007.pdf).

March 30th's IRQ had 23 sites offering 1459 MW of power. Pugwash site (ID# 56) listing for 60 MW power and status "Feasibility Study in Progress" and 9th in the queue.

May 7th has 32 sites offering 1887 MW

(August 31st -
closing date for RFP for 130 MW power)

Sept 19th lists 34 sites offering 1917 MW. Pugwash site status: "Feasibility Study Complete" and now 8th in the queue.

Sept 27th lists 34 sites offering 1870.4 MW. Pugwash site now listed as offering 34 MW power. (Property where 9 turbines were planned was sold).

Oct 16th lists 26 sites offering 1398 MW. Pugwash site status: "Interconnection Request Withdrawl Pending"

All the sites that have dropped off the October list since September were previously listed as having status "Interconnection Request Withdrawl Pending". There were others with the same status in September but are now listed "Interconnection request Valid" (Higgins Mountain), "Feasibility Study Complete" (ID#46, Colchester Co, ID# 84 Pictou Co)) or "Impact Study in Progress" (ID# 67 Annapolis Co).

The only other sites that have downgraded from "Feasibility Study Complete" to
"Interconnection Request Withdrawl Pending" is one in Colchester County (ID# 82) and one for Amherst (ID# 128)

In May, the first 18 sites in the queue are listed as "Feasibility Study in Progress" or "Complete" and all but site #100 (which was 21st and is now no longer listed at all) were listed as "Interconnection Request Valid". Many of these have since dropped off the list or are now listed "
"Interconnection Request Withdrawl Pending".

What all this means is not entirely clear. The definitions used by NSPI seems to have changed somewhat over time.

What it
looks like is that the Pugwash site is no longer being offered to NSPI. This could be for any number of reasons, but it does not necessarily mean the project has been abandoned. It could just mean they are looking for a different customer - one which is not so fussy about where they get their power and how it affects the local people

~~~~~~~~~

It is quite a convoluted process to find this queue list. A long time ago I was given the impression that this was not publicly available. It is, but you need to know how to find it.

To find current IRQs go to the NSPI site http://www.nspower.ca then do a search for "OASIS". Click on the first search result: "
Nova Scotia Power - About NSPI - Transmission & Distribution - Grid Interconnections" which takes you to
http://www.nspower.ca/about_nspi/t_d/grid_interconnections.shtml Look at the menu on the right and click on "Open Access Same Time Information System (OASIS)" The menu on the left has "System Reports and Messages" The next page middle section headed "System Reports" has "Generation Interconnection Queue" listed at the bottom. That opens a .pdf file with the current IRQ (http://oasis.nspower.ca/documents/QUEUE_Oct16_2007.pdf). In an attempt to avoid this long route in, I tried going backwards and then on the IRQ link again. This only took me back to the previous IRQ (Sept 27th) but not to the most recent.



Sunday, September 23, 2007

today's Halifax Daily News

N.S. goes green, but at what cost?
In remedying one problem, we shouldn't ignore signs we're creating another

David Rodenhiser
The Daily News

Wind energy will be an important part of Nova Scotia's cleaner, greener future. But in the rush to set up giant wind-powered turbines to fight global warming, we shouldn't discount growing evidence that they can significantly harm the health of their neighbours if built too close to homes.

Premier Rodney MacDonald's government and Nova Scotia Power are eager to show themselves taking action to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. They've embarked on an aggressive campaign to see the number of turbines operating in the province grow from 40 to more than 250 by 2013.

Their public-relations goals don't justify giving short shrift to the potential health hazards of what's being called "wind turbine syndrome."

Theories about what's causing the condition - including low-frequency vibrations and sound too low for humans to hear called infrasound - are tough to wrap your head around. That plays into the hands of governments and businesses that want to ignore the issue.

After all, if you can't hear a sound, how can it hurt you?

Well, you can't see ultraviolet light, and it can hurt you plenty.

Daniel d'Entremont, his wife Carolyn and six children know the terrifying truth of living next to a wind farm. They started experiencing problems in early 2005 after Atlantic Wind Power installed 17 massive turbines near their home in Lower West Pubnico. The closest tower is little more than 300 metres from their home; all 17 are within 1.6 kilometres.

"Immediately, we noticed ringing in the ears," d'Entremont said. "The children began acting differently. Their behaviour changed. They weren't doing well in school. Things like that. My wife developed high blood pressure."

Over time, it got worse. Carolyn began experiencing blurred vision. One adult son would go blind in one eye or the other for a few minutes at a time. It would clear up, then after a day or two it would happen again. Some mornings when getting out of bed, the same son would have trouble convincing his legs to move.

"I get this pulsating feeling in my chest - a feeling I don't like, but I can't get rid of," d'Entremont said. "I can't shake it off, unless I get away from the turbines."

In February 2006, the d'Entremonts moved to Carolyn's parents' home 30 minutes away. Their problems resolved, some quickly, some more gradually, although Carolyn's blurred vision hasn't completely cleared yet.

The d'Entremonts never wanted to leave their house, which they built in 1982. But d'Entremont, a former fisherman who now works part-time at Wal-Mart, said they can't live there anymore. They haven't found anyone willing to buy it.

"Nobody in his right mind will move here," he said.

Nina Pierpont - the pediatrician, brain specialist and evolutionary biologist who named wind-turbine syndrome - has studied the d'Entremont family's case. She said the d'Entremonts are victims of an industry that tries to discredit or diminish complaints about noise, infrasound and health problems.

"The current approach of the wind industry is to deny that the problems exist and to do nothing about them," Pierpont said.

The industry relies on acoustics consultants, who base their conclusions on engineering principles, as opposed to audiologists and physicians who consider the effects of sound and vibration on the human body.

Pierpont said wind turbine syndrome is very real, and can cause a host of problems including insomnia, headaches, dizziness, unsteadiness, nausea, exhaustion, anxiety, anger, irritability, depression, memory loss, eye problems, tinnitus and problems with concentration and learning.

There may not be just one sole cause of the syndrome. It affects some people, but not others. It may have to with the configuration of individual homes, or the geology beneath them, Pierpont said.

"It's unclear whether it's infrasound or the vibration getting transmitted through rock... Certain people, houses, geological structures, whatever it is causes there to be particularly bothersome forms of noise or vibrations."

Receptors in our extremities that sense vibration and the stretching of muscles respond to inaudible infrasound. Those receptors are tied in neurologically with our sense of equilibrium. Equilibrium can impact balance and vision. Additionally, infrasound can also stimulate the production of the stress hormone cortisol, which can cause high blood pressure.

Pierpont, who practises in rural New York about 30 kilometres from the Quebec border, is one of a number of doctors researching health problems caused by wind turbines. She intends to publish her study in six months and establish a clinical definition of wind turbine syndrome.

Pierpont recommends turbines be erected at least two kilometres away from the nearest home. In Nova Scotia, only four municipalities have bylaws governing turbine setbacks. The common standard is just 500 metres. That's less than the distance from Halifax City Hall to Spring Garden Road.

Tuesday, provincial Energy Minister Bill Dooks announced his department will help the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities hire a consultant to develop best-practice guidelines for wind-turbine bylaws.

"We're very serious about putting towers in the right place," Dooks said. "We want to make people who live in their communities comfortable about this."

It's crucial that they fully consider the human health impacts, but I'm not optimistic. The Energy Department's website includes no discussion of health concerns and places great faith in the wind energy industry. In fact, for Nova Scotians seeking more information, it links to industry websites.

One department official I spoke with Tuesday claimed infrasound fears have been disproved, and referred me to industry research conducted by engineering consultants.

Environmentalists don't seem worried about wind-turbine syndrome, either. The need to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions has created an atmosphere where it's tantamount to sacrilege to raise concerns about turbines. Complaints are dismissed as NIMBYism.

Remember, though, governments and business rejected the science of climate change for decades, producing their own reports in rebuttal. We're seeing the same reaction on a smaller scale to warnings that wind turbines are injuring their neighbours.

Have we learned nothing? In trying to remedy one problem, we shouldn't ignore signs we're creating another.

David Rodenhiser thinks the energy minister should move his family into Daniel d'Entremont's house for a year, then consider policy.

~~~~~~

http://www.hfxnews.ca/index.cfm?sid=64760&sc=93

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Land availability

It is our understanding that wind energy companies were supposed to have secured land lease agreements before they make their application to NSPI.

The land owner that AWPC had planned on putting the nine most easterly turbines (#19 - 27) never signed the lease agreement. This land is not, nor will ever be, available for wind energy development.

It seems other local land owners are being approached by AWPC for land lease agreements.

Does NSPI know this?

Has the environmental assessment included these sites?

What is going on?


Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Holding our breath

Applications to Nova Scotia Power Inc (NSPI) for request for Proposals (RFPs) were due by August 31st.

Everyone - proponents, land owners and local residents alike - are holding their breath, waiting to find out who's projects have reached NSPI's short list. This list is to be released fairly soon. The final list should be released later in the fall.

Some proponents have put in multiple applications, some have grouped multiple projects in one application.

Rumours abound as to who has applied for which projects, or if they have deferred to the next phase of RFPs.

We are told that NSPI is very sensitive to controversial proposals. It is a private company which, we are told, would prefer to avoid any conflict.

We (Gulf Shore Preservation Association) have sent letters to the Premier, the Ministers of Environment and Labour, Energy, Tourism, Municipal Relations and Economic Development and to NSPI. AWPC, CAWF, CBCL and Cumberland County Municipality have been sent copies. Included in these communications have been copies of letters of opposition from large community groups. There are over 1,100 paper petitions signed and 270 online versions. The paper petitions are in the last stages of being collated.

The opposition to this particular project is made crystal clear.

Wednesday, September 5, 2007

Dutch turbines going offshore

The story below comes from Monday's Globe and Mail. The original story is found at the link:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070903.wdutchwind0903/BNStory/Science/home

The comments section is very interesting and worth a visit, even though it turns into a wind vs nuclear discussion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dutch adding more wind turbines

Reuters

IJMUIDEN, Netherlands — There is no shortage of wind in the densely populated Netherlands, but there is a shortage of space and in a nation that likes its houses small and its gardens cosy, opposition to wind farms is immense.

That is why a new Dutch wind farm is being built so far out to sea that it is barely visible on the horizon, reducing the visual impact of its 60 turbines to virtually nil while at the same time harnessing higher offshore wind speeds.

Offshore wind farms are likely to appear more and more frequently off European coastlines as governments seek to increase their use of renewable energy without angering their citizens by placing giant turbines on their doorsteps.

The €383-million ($549-million Canadian) Q7 wind park development, 23 kilometres from the Dutch North Sea coast, is the farthest offshore wind park anywhere in the world, and its developers Econcern and Eneco Energie say a further five to 10 such wind parks will likely follow in the next few years.

"Q7 will contribute enough electricity for 125,000 households, but it is also a learning process. We are learning how to build these wind farms, how to organize the supply chain, and how to manage and operate them," said Bernard van Hemert, one of the wind farm's engineering directors.

"Most campaigns against turbines are based around the noise and the visual impact, and these have been reduced by going offshore. It is more expensive to do it here than to do it on land, but we have all agreed we don't have enough space on land," Mr. van Hemert said.

Blessed with shallow sandy soils around their coastline, Dutch engineers say the foundations for the turbines can be hammered 25 metres into the ground in just a matter of hours, although there are myriad other challenges.

The proportions are breathtaking. The turbines extend about 98 metres from the ocean, with three sharp narrow blades, each 40 metres long.

It is hoped that when they start rotating in early 2008 they will cut carbon-dioxide emissions by 225,000 tonnes, helping the Dutch to meet a target of 20-per-cent renewable energy use by 2020.

Tricky logistics

The turbines are so massive that they can be transported only by sea and there is only one factory in Europe which can weld and construct the 4.5-metre-diameter piles, which must be first driven into the sea to form the base of the turbines, Mr. van Hemert said.

"It is a huge logistical operation that requires lots of space. There are only a few crane vessels that can handle those huge structures and hammer them down.

"But bringing up the cables is the most challenging for all offshore wind projects."

Expert divers are helping to fit the electrics.

Developers have also had to ensure that the wind park is well away from busy shipping channels.

"Studies in the United Kingdom have shown that there can be some radio interference but in the situation we have here it is completely safe and there is no risk of confusion or reduced visibility for vessels."

Jim Mollet, chairman of a Dutch group campaigning against wind energy acknowledges off-shore wind farms have some benefits over land-based wind turbines.

"They can be a better solution. But the problem is people tend to believe they are an entire solution. We think the vast sums spent on wind farms would be better spent on research and innovation in other energy sources."

Wind farms cannot generate the sheer amounts of energy the continent requires with cost or space efficiency, he added.

Monday, August 27, 2007

Man killed after wind tower collapses


The photo shows the collapsed wind turbine tower. Photos courtesy of Brian Hulke

By KATU Web Staff

NEAR WASCO, Ore. - A giant wind turbine tower collapsed Saturday in Eastern Oregon, causing a worker to fall to his death and another man to be injured.

The man killed is from Goldendale, Wash., while the second man is from Minnesota, according to Deputy Geremy Shull of the Sherman County Sheriff's Office.

The man from Minnesota was at last check listed in serious but stable condition at Mid-Columbia Medical Center in The Dalles, Shull said.

He did not release the names of the men.

The incident happened about 4 p.m. at a wind farm about six miles east of the town of Wasco in Sherman County, Shull said. Portland-based PPM Energy owns the wind farm but Florida-based Siemens Power Generation manufactured and owns the wind turbine tower that collapsed.

Melanie Forbrick, a Siemens spokeswoman, said three people were at the site when the accident happened, two of whom were Siemens Power Generation employees and a third a contractor.

Shull said the worker killed in the incident was at the top of a turbine tower when the support column holding the turbine buckled about halfway up and toppled over. Forbrick said the injured man was inside of the tower at the time while the third worker, who escaped injury, was at the base.

She said the turbine had been in operation for 500 hours and the workers were doing a routine inspection.

Forbrick said federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration officials were on site Sunday investigating.

"We are very saddened by this event and our sympathy goes out to the families and the workers as well," Forbrick said.

Forbrick said she did not know how the height of the turbine. Bonneville Power Administration documents from last year said the turbine towers would stand 263 feet high and reach about 400 feet with blades included.

The Klondike III wind project, located in the wheat fields near Wasco, is expected to generate 221 megawatts of electricity when it's completed in late 2007, said Jan Johnson, a spokeswoman for PPM Energy. PPM is using 44 Siemens 2.3 megawatt wind turbines and 80 General Electric 1.5 megawatt wind turbines.

- The Associated Press contributed to this report.


http://www.komotv.com/news/local/9383316.html

From today's Chronicle Herald

Quietly sounding alarm
Forced from home after noise from wind farm turbines made family sick, d’Entremont telling others his story
By Yarmouth Bureau | 6:04 AM


DANIEL D’ENTREMONT has become somewhat of a poster boy for people opposed to having wind farms in their neighbourhood.

He was in Kincardine, Ont., this spring for a speaking engagement and recently returned from Chilton, Wis.

An Illinois trip is also on the horizon for Mr. d’Entremont, the Yarmouth County man who relocated his family of eight away from a local wind farm.

He says the noise from the turbines was making his family sick.

In Ontario, a group of people who had formed a wind-action group invited him to speak.

"They weren’t opposed to wind power but they were just fearful of the effects it would have when wind farms would encroach too close," said Mr. d’Entremont.

In Wisconsin, he was invited by local homeowners who had heard of him.

~~~~~~~


Daniel d’Entremont says this poster of his house in Pubnico Point is being used in Manitoba by a group opposed to windmills being built too close to homes. (brian medel / Yarmouth Bureau)

~~~~~~~

"When they found out these wind companies were proposing wind sites . . . close to their homes they got together and they were afraid for their homes. . . . They want these windmills set farther back," he said.

"They learned of me through Dr. Nina Pierpont from Upstate New York."

She’s a pediatrician who studies the effects of wind turbines on kids.

She did a clinical interview with Mr. d’Entremont over the phone early last year and "presented it to a wide audience," he said.

~~~~~~~

Daniel d’Entremont stands in front of his Lower West Pubnico home. He moved his family out of the house last year after noise from the nearby wind farm was making them sick. The nearest wind turbine is about 350 metres from the house.(brian medel / Yarmouth Bureau)

~~~~~~~

He and his wife Carolyn decided to move last year with their six children back to her parent’s home in Abrams River, about 35 kilometres from the 17-turbine wind farm at Pubnico Point, operated by Atlantic Wind Power Corp. Ltd.

The constant swooshing sounds from the turbines — the closest being 350 metres from their Lower West Pubnico house — was making everyone sick, he said.

No one in the household could concentrate for long and headaches were frequent among family members, he remembers.

Now people want to hear all about his experiences first-hand.

He said there is a common question: "What was life (like) with (wind) turbines next door, in the backyard?"

And what did these audiences find interesting or startling?

"Everything – from the health affects to just the shear magnitude of the noise," said Mr. d’Entremont.

His said his family, for instance, had to use noise to block out noise.

"All (bed)rooms had fans eventually, but the kids would have fans right at their heads, especially the small ones, just to mitigate the noise.

"They could sleep with the fan noise but not with the windmill noise.

"It’s an intrusion. It’s a violation. You feel violated," said Mr. d’Entremont.

People often seemed surprised after hearing him speak, he said. "It really opened their eyes to the potential problems.

"Everybody is not impacted the same way, but a large number of them would be impacted severely."

Mr. d’Entremont has had his expenses covered on these speaking engagements, but has refused to take a fee for both speaking engagements. He said he has another session coming up in Illinois sometime soon.

And Dr. Pierpont contacted him again this month, asking that he undergo some tests at a U.S. medical centre after his upcoming appearance in Illinois.

Dr. Pierpont has arranged for a doctor in Lafayette, Ind., to do some work, he said.

She wants to speak with the d’Entremont children individually.

"She’s going to publish this in a medical journal," said Mr. d’Entremont.

He’s e-mailed the premier to let him know what he’s been doing and wants the government to agree to relocate his family.

"They’re both responsible, the government and the wind farm," said Mr. d’Entremont, about decisions made to operate wind turbines so close to dwellings.

Natural Resources Canada ordered a study of noise levels at the site. Testing in 2005 by an Ontario firm determined that sound from the turbines is continually audible, to varying degrees.

The wind power company has made some noise reducing alterations to some of their equipment, president Charles Demond said this week.

"We’ve reconfigured some of the turbines so that they do not engage or generate any power until a higher . . . wind speed," he said.

"At lower wind speeds, if the wind is coming from a southerly direction, then certain of the turbines will not come on until a higher threshold," said Mr. Demond.

He could not say what the wind speeds were or how many machines have been reconfigured.

Mr. d’Entremont said he has seen the three windmills closest to his home shut down during daytime hours, but has heard the same units operating again after dark.

"You can hear them from (my house)," he said.

No one from the company has told him of any changes to turbine operations, he said.

Daniel d’Entremont and his family still live in Abrams River with in-laws and their home in Lower West Pubnico is vacant and still for sale.

"Nobody wants to live near a wind farm," said Mr. d’Entremont.


TURBINE TALK:

•The company that owns the Pubnico Point Wind Park is Atlantic Wind Power Inc.

•The Pubnico project includes 17 turbines connected by 5.2 kilometres of access roads.

• Atlantic Wind Power is also one of two companies now proposing to build upwards of 21 wind turbines on Nuttby Mountain in Colchester County, which is said to be the highest spot in mainland Nova Scotia.

• Atlantic Wind Power, together with Cobequid Wind Power, will operate the wind farm under the name Cobequid Area Windfarms Inc.

• Developers are leasing more than 200 hectares of land on Nuttby Mountain and the turbines would be built approximately 1.5 kilometres from the nearest home, say proponents.


Friday, August 24, 2007

Unhealthy noise

Noise of modern life blamed for thousands of heart deaths

· Stress of exposure adds to risks, says WHO report
· Light traffic is enough for chronic levels at night

  • The Guardian
  • Thursday August 23 2007
Thousands of people in Britain and around the world are dying prematurely from heart disease triggered by long-term exposure to excessive noise, according to research by the World Health Organisation. Coronary heart disease caused 101,000 deaths in the UK in 2006, and the study suggests that 3,030 of these are caused by chronic noise exposure, including to daytime traffic.

Deepak Prasher, professor of audiology at University College London, told the New Scientist magazine: "The new data provide the link showing there are earlier deaths because of noise. Until now, noise has been the Cinderella form of pollution and people haven't been aware that it has an impact on their health."

The WHO's working group on the Noise Environmental Burden on Disease began work on the health effects of noise in Europe in 2003. In addition to the heart disease link, it found that 2% of Europeans suffer severely disturbed sleep because of noise pollution and 15% can suffer severe annoyance. Chronic exposure to loud traffic noise causes 3% of tinnitus cases, in which people constantly hear a noise in their ears.

Research published in recent years has shown that noise can increase the levels of stress hormones such as cortisol, adrenaline and noradrenalin in the body, even during sleep. The longer these hormones stay in circulation around the bloodstream, the more likely they are to cause life-threatening physiological problems. High stress levels can lead to heart failure, strokes, high blood pressure and immune problems.

"All this is happening imperceptibly," said Prof Prasher. "Even when you think you are used to the noise, these physiological changes are still happening."

The WHO came to its figures by comparing households with abnormally high exposure to noise with those in quieter homes. It also studied people with problems such as coronary heart disease and tried to work out if high noise levels had been a factor in developing the condition. This data was then combined with maps showing the noisiest European cities.

According to the WHO guidelines, the noise threshold for cardiovascular problems is chronic night-time exposure of 50 decibels (dB) or above - the noise of light traffic. For sleep disturbance, the threshold is 42dB, for general annoyance it is 35dB, the sound of a whisper.

Ellen Mason, a cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation, said: "Our world is undoubtedly getting busier and noisier. Some people find noise pollution more stressful to live with than others do. Noise cannot directly kill us, but it may add to our stress. Occasionally, stressful events can trigger a heart attack in someone with underlying heart disease. We know that stressed people are more likely to eat unhealthily, exercise less and smoke more, and these can increase the risk of developing heart disease in the first place."

Mary Stevens, policy officer at the National Society for Clean Air, said of the study's results: "We welcome this because one of the problems with noise is that it's one of the areas that local authorities get most complaints about and it's a big draw on their resources. But, unlike air quality, it hasn't been taken that seriously policy-wise because there [wasn't] the link between noise and health."

Ms Stevens said that there were many options for reducing noise. Traffic could be quietened if more cars used low-noise tyres and councils installed low-noise road surfaces, for example. And coordinating roadworks by utility companies would also prevent the proliferation of potholes, another source of noisy traffic.

The EU has already issued a directive that obligates European cities with populations greater than 250,000 to produce digitised noise maps showing where traffic noise and volume is greatest. "[The research] all supports work going on at the moment to manage traffic noise, which is driven by the environmental noise directive," said Ms Stevens.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/aug/23/sciencenews.uknews

Friday, August 10, 2007

Pictou County turbine setbacks

The story below is in today's Chronicle Herald.

~~~~~~~~~

County deciding wind turbine rules


PICTOU — A wind-turbine bylaw under consideration by Pictou County council may include some of the province’s most restrictive conditions.

If the bylaw passes a public hearing and final readings next month, large wind turbines capable of supplying electricity to the power grid will have to be placed at least 600 metres from homes.

That’s the farthest distance legislated so far in Nova Scotia, said Pictou County Warden Allister MacDonald, adding that other jurisdictions call for a 500-metre setback.

The land-use bylaw, which applies to no other land use in Pictou County than wind turbines, calls for the structures to be at least 300 metres from public roads. Both utility and domestic turbines must be at least their own height from property lines in case they topple.

"We’ve listened to what the people had to say," Mr. MacDonald said.

After council was approached by a development company last year, councillors met with developers, consultants and concerned residents to draft a bylaw and changed it seven times before its first reading this week.

"Council has stated very clearly it’s in favour of wind energy," Mr. MacDonald said. "At the same time we have to protect the interests of the residents and the developers."

The setback does not apply to residences on the same lot as wind turbines, to future homes built less than 600 metres from an already existing wind turbine or to later purchasers of those homes. The property line setback will be waived if adjacent properties are leased for a long term to the wind-turbine owner.

The bylaw does not restrict the number of turbines on a property as long as the setback rules are followed, but it does regulate the expansion of turbines existing before the bylaw’s introduction.

There are now three utility turbines in Pictou County — two on Fitzpatrick Mountain and one in Marshville — with more in the planning stages for other areas of the county.

~~~~~~~~~~

My comment

Cumberland County has less than half (46%) the population density of Pictou County, yet has passed a land use bylaw amendment for wind turbines to be no less than 500m from a residence. That is from a residence - not from a property line.

How can Pictou County manage to write a bylaw that keeps turbines 600m from a residence, keeps them back from roads and property lines, but Cumberland County cannot? Pictou has actually paid attention to suggestions from its residents.

There are large wind farm developments being suggested for Pictou County. Shearwind's owner tells me that his Glendhu project is a minimum 4km from a residence.

Why can't projects destined for Cumberland County keep back at least as far?

Sunday, August 5, 2007

More communities affected

In the last several months my neighbours and I have directly spoken to many people whose lives have been affected by wind energy projects. It seems like there is not a project out there, large or small, that leaves a community unaffected.

We have most recently heard from Pastor Mark Harris of Mars Hill, Maine. Pastor Harris was here at the Seventh Day Adventist camp on the Gulf Shore this week. This camp sees an average of 1000 people per week through the summer season.

There is only one wind farm in Maine, and it is on Mars Hill. There are 20 families whose lives have been seriously and detrimentally affected by this project, built by UPC. Some turbines are extremely close to families. Complaints have been made from people living as far away as three miles.


They complain of sleep disturbance and migraines. A couple who was running a retreat for autistic children with riding horses and a petting zoo has had to stop business. Not because of the animals, but because the movement, noise and strobing from the wind farm was seriously affecting the children.


Pastor Harris and his wife had planned to build their retirement home on Mars Hill, but that plan is now on hold until the turbines issue is resolved satisfactorily.

They have 80 acres on the mountain off which he periodically cuts off fire wood. He describes how when he goes up there early in the morning, he can hear the birds in the trees, the rustling leaves, babbling brook and the thump, thump thump of the nearest turbines. After he puts on his hearing protection in preparation to cut wood, he can no longer hear the birds, leaves or brook – but he can still hear the thump, thump, thump of the wind turbine.

Hunters have noticed that large mammals have left the mountain. Bird and bat kill is only part of an environmental impact to wildlife – avoidance of the area is another part of it.


Pubnico, Marshville, Brookfield, Amherst NS, Elmira PEI and Mars Hill, Maine.


Direct conversations with people who have either moved away or would like to. In Rodney, there is a couple who don't want to move away at all – their families have lived in the area for generations – they just want the noise to stop. She would like to be able to lie in bed at night and not feel her chest vibrating. They have to run a radio in the garage when working in there, because otherwise the turbine noise reverberates so loudly, it makes use of the garage too uncomfortable.

There are some people who do not seem to be affected by the noise and vibrations – but for as long as there are people who are – these machines have to be located so as not to possibly affect anyone living near them.

It really isn't complicated. Keep them away from people!

http://www.barehillsoftware.com/Welcome%20to%20Mars%20Hill-PC.wmv

Friday, July 27, 2007

Agriculture Canada shuts down new turbines - CBC

A $200,000 wind turbine installed at an Agriculture Canada research station on P.E.I. has been shut down because of complaints it's too noisy.

The turbine was installed to provide green energy to the research station in Harrington, north of Charlottetown, but operated for only two days before it was shut down for good.

"We had a call from a neighbour complaining about the noise and that it caused ill health to them," said Mike Hennigar of Agriculture Canada, "so we made the decision to turn it off and further investigate what exactly was going on with it."

The neighbour was complaining of migraine headaches.

Agriculture Canada tested the noise at the foot of the tower with a decibel meter and measured 62 dB in high winds, a level of sound somewhere between a clothes dryer and a washing machine.

The department had an environmental assessment done before the 30-metre high, three-blade turbine was installed. The consultant said the location of the turbine, 300 metres from the road and 400 metres from the nearest house, should not cause any problem.

Hennigar said Agriculture Canada is considering relocating the turbine, which would cost about $120,000, or perhaps selling it. He said it would not be operating again at its current location.

Story from CBC http://www.cbc.ca/canada/prince-edward-island/story/2007/07/27/agriculture-wind.html

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Strong local opposition

With all the recent media buzz over a proposed wind energy project in the Pugwash/Gulf Shore area, it seems strange that this has not engendered howls of protest from the other dozen or more areas in Nova Scotia where similar projects are being developed.

There are a couple of reasons why this could be. The local residents may not be aware of a potential project or there are no nearby residents to complain. I suggest the latter is the more likely scenario. That is: that these projects are more appropriately located, away from populated areas.

The wind energy project in Pugwash would impact hundreds of year round and seasonal residents. These people come here to live, play and retire for the peace, quiet and beauty of the area.

A petition signed by over 500 people makes it very clear that there is strong opposition to this project.

What does it take for the proponent to understand that this opposition and bad press over this project could harm future wind energy projects in this province?

Monday, July 23, 2007

Elmira, PEI

Visit to Elmira PEI, a Vestas Wind Farm, and with Dwayne and Kevin Bailey

On July 20, 2007 Ruth & I decided to drive from the Gulf Shore to Elmira, which is on the northeastern tip of PEI, to visit with Dwayne Bailey and his father, Kevin, and view the new local wind farm. Both abandoned their lifelong homes because they could not tolerate the noise from this facility.

The Elmira wind farm uses Vestas V90 turbines. Each is approximately 120 meters high with blade diameters of 90 meters, average rotational speed of 16 rpm and power outputs of three megawatts each. Vestas turbines were used at Pubnico, and are also proposed for the Gulf Shore. Initial plans here were for 30 turbines, so far 10 have been placed. This could be the first of several proposed projects along the northeast shore.


View of Wind Farm From the Bailey’s Farm


We met Dwayne and Kevin at their old homes in Elmira. Their farm is across the road from the wind turbines, about 1 km away. This is traditional farmland with fields and scattered woodlands. Their farm was set on a slight hill rising from the road to the fields behind the homes. The Baileys are lobster fishermen who rent their farmland out for crops “so that the weeds do not take over the place”. Dwayne is a volunteer firefighter as well.


Dwayne reported that the wind farm was a PEI Provincial Government project. There were two initial community information meetings. Approximately $40,000 was offered for a community centre, and bonds were issued for those residents who wanted to invest in the project.

He said that a transmission line was constructed from Souris to take the power from these and other proposed turbines to the Maritime Electric Power grid. The plant was operational February 2007. Except for some basic construction and excavation work, plus crane work by Irving, Vestas did the majority of the installation. The site now has two to four employees. There was very little local employment as a result of this project.

Breakdowns and repairs were common. It was rare to have all 10 turbines working together. Dwayne stated that a few months ago, a portion of a rotor flew off one of the turbines and landed on a company vehicle’s hood.


Bailey Farm, Elmira, PEI


When we first drove into their yard, our initial impression was that their one kilometer setback distance should be fine. However, their problems began within weeks after the turbines started operating. When they were downwind from the turbines, and the air was moving just enough to turn them, (12-15 knots from the northeast), the noise was loud. It was a repetitive modulated drone of sound. Dwayne and Kevin both claimed it sometimes was loud enough to rattle the windows of their homes. The sound was even worse in the field behind their homes. Distances from 1 to 1.5 kilometers were the areas of the most annoying sounds. This spring the winds created constant misery.

Dwayne developed headaches, popping and ringing ears, and could not sleep. He tried new glasses, prescription sleep aids and earplugs, to no avail.

Dwayne’s two year old was sleeping well prior to the wind farm, but began waking up, 5-6 times a night.

Kevin Bailey stated, “When you are outside working and absorbed in what you are doing, you are OK. If inside, resting or reading, it’s a problem. Forget about sleeping at night. The repetitions would go away, you think that it is gone, and it comes back again.” Kevin tried sound dampening by draping the front walls inside his house, and sleeping in the back, but this did not work.

Kevin had problems with his electrical appliances. The fridge, water heater and power meter all vibrated. He purchased a new fridge, and it was just as bad. When the fridge was moved to the new house, the vibrations were gone.

They complained to the province and the municipality, but no one would take them seriously. One official suggested it was too quiet there which is a funny kind of problem to have. There was not enough ambient background noise to block out the sound.

Both families moved two weeks ago and they are feeling better. “We had to move back into town to get away from the noise.”

They could not in all good conscience sell the homes, but if they did, they felt new purchasers would soon be demanding their money back.

Dwayne said, “We have had six generations of little feet running through the grass, but now that is gone.”

Kevin noted, “All we ever had here was peace and quiet, and poverty. Now we only have poverty.”



Vestas V90 WindFarm, Elmira, PEI



We toured the wind farm site. Initially the winds were 12-14 knots. Downwind at 500 meters there was a loud rhythmic whooshing sound coming from each of the turbines that could be easily identified with their rotation. At least three or four turbines could be heard at once. The sounds were out of sync and confused. At 300 meters each turbine was very noisy from any
direction. There is absolutely no way you could live next to a turbine at this distance. We stood at the base. There were many sounds. Electrical high pitched humming, the deep whoosh of the sails or rotors as they sweep past every 5 seconds, a steady swish of the rotor tips, which are cutting through the air at 240 kilometers per hour. When the wind changed, the rotors made a sound like a jet engine taking off, until they were in position again.

Wind Farm with Ruth at Turbine Base

Within 300 meters, the towers and blades were incredibly imposing. Not something you would want to be around, or see. Looking up and watching the blades spin, hearing all the noise, was frightening. In winter ice throw anywhere within range of these units would be a huge concern. Dwayne had told us that the fire department was warned that in winter if they were required, they were to be very careful where they parked.

We went 1 km downwind and the loud rhythmic sounds could be heard from various turbines at different speeds, again, all out of sync with each other. A curiosity for a few minutes, but you could never live with this noise.

The wind picked up to about 18-20 knots and when downwind 700 meters to 1.5 km away, standing outside, you could not hear the noise. However, inside our car with the window down and out of the turbulence of the outside air the sounds returned.

Wind Farm from three kilometers away


Wind turbine setback bylaws for Cumberland County are clearly inadequate for protection of the rights of residents who will be living adjacent to wind turbines. They desperately need to be re-examined and amended.

Paul and Ruth Downing


Quote from Dr Nina Pierpont, MD, PhD

"I am a physician and scientist; my expertise lies in clinical and environmental matters. Whether or not wind proves to be a viable source of power, it is absolutely essential that windmills not be sited any closer than 1.5 miles from people's homes or anywhere else people regularly congregate. (Highways are also a problem for motorists with seizure and migraine disorders and motion sensitivity, from the huge spinning blades and landscape-sweeping shadow flicker.) I consider a 1.5 mile set-back a minimum figure. In hilly or mountainous topographies, where valleys act as natural channels for noise, this 1.5 mile set-back should be extended anywhere from 2-3 miles from homes.

"Let me be clear: there is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the wind energy proposition that says windmills must be sited next door (often 1000 feet) to people's homes and workplaces. Siting, after all, is the crux of the issue.

"Irresponsible siting is what most of the uproar is about. Corporate economics favor building wind turbines in people's backyards; sound clinical medicine, however, does not."

http://www.ninapierpont.com/?s=wind&p=2

Sunday, July 22, 2007

report for CanWEA

Suggested information sent in by Cobequid Area Wind farms: here are two reports made for the Canadian Wind Energy Association and conducted by Howe Gastmeier Chapnik Ltd (HGC)

Report on Infrasound, published November 29 2006
http://www.canwea.ca/images/uploads/File/CanWEA_Infrasound_Study_Final.pdf

This report acknowledges that infrasound is produced by turbines, but human health is not affected. There are many reports to dispute this assertion:
http://www.icsv12.ist.utl.pt/papers/session.php?id=10
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10189173&dopt=Citation
http://kirbymtn.blogspot.com/2006/04/vibroacoustic-disease-and-wind.html

Best practice guidelines, published February 14th 2007
http://www.canwea.ca/images/uploads/File/CanWEA_Wind_Turbine_Sound_Study_-_Final.pdf

Note pages 14 and 15 in Review of Canadian Experience when it is suggested that complaints from noise are much reduced if setbacks are at 1000m or more.

AWPC/CAWF is proposing to be only 500m away from our homes.

The report also talks about how good public relations are essential.

Ahem!

Friday, July 20, 2007

more video and reports

Cobequid Wind Farms asked me to post some more video links and .pdf files. This process will take a while, because I want to preview them, and all we have here is dial-up.

Here's the first one (19MB):

Maple Ridge in New York - the largest wind farm in New York with 120 turbines (Wikipedia). This is located in primarily agricultural land. No cottages to be seen anywhere!
http://www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/windpoweringamerica/filter_detail.asp?itemid=1211

More information about this same project:
http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/05/30/study-shows-hundreds-of-dead-birds-bats-at-wind-turbines/

http://www.windaction.org/pictures/482

Required viewing

Anyone who had any doubts before that wind turbines should not be located too close to residential areas should watch the videos listed below.

Pennsylvania and New York (approx 24 minutes)
Texas (approx 3.5 minutes)

Australia (approx 10 minutes)

Lincolnshire, England (approx 15 minutes)

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Comments

As much as I enjoy many of the comments on this blog, I am disturbed that some people see this as an opportunity to make personal attacks, some quite libelous. Not just towards me, but towards my friends and neighbours who nevertheless see these comments for what they are.

It is clear that these are comments from a particular group who see this open forum as a threat to their wind energy interests.

The more rabid, outrageous and threatening they are, the more foolish and desperate they look.

I simply do not have time to moderate discussion, so if this goes too off track, I will simply have to shut down the comments section - as I did some months ago for the same reasons.

I could pick and chose which comments to keep, but I'd rather not get involved in the slippery slope of censorship - its all or nothing.

This blog was started up to introduce all kinds of information to educate and question, and that will continue regardless.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Wind Turbine Development - Gulf Shore Road, Pugwash , NS Petition

Online petitions are all the rage now. Get in on the action.

You don't have to have your e-mail address seen. Comments are welcome. This is a petition against this particular wind farm location. It is not against wind energy.

Wind Turbine Development - Gulf Shore Road, Pugwash , NS Petition

Monday, July 16, 2007

Recuitment?

There seems to be some confusion as to the intelligence and integrity of the local population.

It has been suggested in the press by certain people and in some comments here that locals and cottagers have been led by a small group of weirdos into believing wind energy is bad and that they must oppose a proposed wind farm here.

It seems extraordinary that hundreds of people - including lawyers, doctors, dentists, judges, leaders of industry, teachers, RCMP officers, business owners and regular joes have been somehow hypnotized into believing in this one cause.

Give me a break!!

These are intelligent, educated people who can make up their own minds!

No one here has ever said that wind energy is bad.

The suggestion that we only care about what is immediately on our own doorstep is also insulting. We understand that what happens locally affects us all - locally. Just because someone speaking in opposition is more than two kilometers away does not mean that they do not have a concern.

These people can see the bigger picture.

Clair Peers is quoted in a recent Canada.com story by CanWest News as saying the Gulf Shore Association knew (Anne) Murray had a cottage nearby and likely recruited her in their battle against the project. "It's probably a clever tactic to get someone famous involved. It's been an ongoing thing."

Recruitment? There's been no necessity for any recruitment because Anne and the hundreds of others that oppose this particular project needed no recruitment. They have made informed, educated decisions all by themselves. We have been approached by them.

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Letter to Premier Rodney MacDonald

Dear Mr MacDonald,

As I am sure you are aware there is growing concern and opposition over the issue of a proposed wind energy project in the Pugwash/Gulf Shore area.

As I am sure you noticed while you were here for the Pugwash Peace Exchange last weekend, this is a beautiful and peaceful area. Indeed, Cyrus Eaton invited the original conference attendees here 50 years ago just because of the peace and quiet Pugwash has to offer.

This is quite blatantly the wrong location for such a project and I am afraid that the longer the prospect of this project remains, the louder the opposition it will garner. This is not good for the wind energy industry. Other proponents are deeply concerned that their own, responsible projects will suffer from poor public support as a repercussion of what is going on here.

I would ask the Nova Scotia Government to take a serious, long, hard look at this whole industry and take some leadership by declaring the minimum standards by which wind energy projects must abide. A responsible, intelligent set of standards could set the way for the rest of the country! Use the experience of those who have had turbines for decades and learn from their mistakes.

Blindly surging ahead into wind energy without considering health and safety factors and reasonable enjoyment of a resident's property is not looking after your constituents - the people of Nova Scotia.

Currently there are guidelines as suggested by the Dept of Environment and Labour, but they are just that, guidelines. Given the fact that environmental assessments are conducted by firms that are paid by the proponents, these guidelines are way too easily potentially bent towards the benefit of the paying customer - the wind energy company.

These minimum standards should apply to current land use, for example protecting areas of outstanding beauty (Peggy's Cove), and for preserving current land use (tourist/recreation/retirement/residential areas such as ours). These standards should also include a well researched setback for turbines. These should apply differently for differently used areas, depending on the current land use. Setbacks for residential areas would not be necessarily the same as it would be for industrial areas.

There is growing medical evidence that turbines are affecting the health of people living nearby. In our own province a family of 6 has had to move out of their beautiful home in Pubnico and there are residents near other turbines in Brookfield and Marshville who are trying to sell their homes to get away from the noise and disturbance. Two families in Elmira, PEI abandoned their home two weeks ago for the same reasons.

Please do not allow the current guidelines to allow for turbines to be located too close to us and affect our health and our reasonable enjoyment of our properties. The people of Nova Scotia should be protected by our government, not exploited by it.

Please err on the side of caution and call a moratorium of all wind power developments that are any closer than 2km of a residence until independent and government research has been done to establish the safe and healthy distance from a turbine people should be living. This distance may not be the same as for work places, depending on the number of hours a day a person is exposed to the noise, vibrations and infrasound of a turbine, or even more so, multiple turbines.

These projects don't just affect the health of Nova Scotians but their economic development, tourism and environment generally. These Departments need to work together on these standards so that they work in concert, not in conflict.

Renewable energy should be encouraged in every way, but it has to be conducted in a responsible and intelligent manner that benefits ALL the people of Nova Scotia in all respects.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Media noise

Thank you Anne Murray for your support!

Thank you to the hundreds of others who have also voiced their support in trying to preserve this beautiful, peaceful area.

Maybe some of the media interest spurred by Ms Murray's comments will help AWPC (and their subsidiary Cobequid Area Wind Farms [CAWF]) to finally understand that there is considerable opposition to this proposed project. There is no small voice of just a few people here, the entire Shore is in opposition.

I will say this again until I am blue in the face - we are NOT OPPOSED TO GREEN ENERGY!!


However, these projects have to be located in a responsible manner. They have to go where the local people will not be disturbed or made sick by these behemoths.

On Elmira, PEI two homes have just been abandoned by their owners because they were being made sick by the new turbines that went up earlier this year. These turbines are the same Vestas turbines used in Pubnico and proposed for the Gulf Shore. Their doctor recommended that they spend as little time as possible at home. They were experiencing headaches, ringing in their ears, dizziness and disturbed sleep. This has happened to people who were 1km from the turbines. This is a farm of currently 10 turbines. There are more planned. They were able to move away because they could afford to do it. Their neighbours are not able to afford to move away.

As we know, the d'Entremonts abandoned their home in Pubnico for the same reasons some time ago.

And AWPC/CAWP wants to bring 27 of the same industrial sized machines to within 500m of our homes (or 0m from a property line)!

The idea of someone coming into my neighbourhood, uninvited and unwanted, deliberately erecting industrial sized (400') machines that will make us sick is unconscionable!! We will not be railroaded.

As one comment on an earlier posting says: this opposition will not end. There will just be more and more of us.

The longer this project is proposed, the more difficult questions for the industry in general are being raised - this is bad media for the industry.
The sooner the plug is pulled on this particular project the better it will be for for the wind energy industry in general.

It is all very well to suggest going to Pubnico to view the turbines (which some of our group has done and agree they are noisy) - what about coming up here to the Shore and admire it for its beauty and tranquility?

It would be a very inefficient use of gasoline to drive 5 hours one way just to look at some turbines in Pubnico when we could drive 1.5 hours to Elmira and look at the same machines! Let's be energy efficient here!

Charles told us himself at the Pugwash Chamber of Commerce meeting, NS Power can only use the power from about 200 turbines. This is because wind energy cannot, currently, be stored. When the wind dies there is thus a chance of power brown (or even black) outs. This can be mitigated somewhat by spreading the turbines around the province. There are 41 turbines of various sizes producing nearly 60 MW. Seems to me there are remote, unpopulated spots on the Cobequids and Cape Breton not far from transmission lines that could easily accommodate the turbines we need.


The Request For Proposals made March 12th for 130 MW power is not just for wind energy projects but for all renewable energy including biomass, land fill gas, tidal and hydro.

There is a queue for wind energy projects. This project is currently 9th in the queue, behind at least three 100MW proposals. AWPC can jump the queue if they are "ready" before their competition. Being ninth just means that eight other projects put their applications in earlier.

To be "ready" they have to have a project that will satisfy NS Power that there is public support for it.

Ha!

Thursday, July 5, 2007

Noisy turbines in Pubnico may cut off WIPPI funding

Atlantic Wind Power Corp had participated in the Wind Power Production Incentive (WIPPI) which is a grant of $10 million (of tax payer's money) over a period of nine years. Natural Resources Canada (NRC) has asked AWPC to produce a proposal as to how they can mitigate the excessive noise at Pubnico. If they cannot produce a proposal (and act on it) to NRC's liking they can cancel the grant.

Last May, NRC retained Howe Gastmeier Chapnik Limited (HGC Ltd) to conduct a noise study (again, tax payer's money) of the Pubnico wind farm. This was in response to noise complaints by Daniel d'Entremont and his family.

HGC is an engineering consultancy firm in Ontario which specializes in noise, vibration and acoustics
http://www.hgcengineering.com/

The study was conducted from 5-11 May 2006.

The study confirmed that the d'Entremont home was sometimes being exposed to higher than recommended noise levels, sometimes by as much as 13 dBA. The noise was worst when it came from the direction of the turbines and when the wind was light.

HGC used noise level criteria from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE). MOE uses higher threshold levels than the World Health Organization.

When the winds were too light for any turbines to operate (< 5m/s) the d'Entremont home was observed to show a sound level of 30dBA.

The MOE criteria for turbine noise are 40dBA at "cut in " wind speed of 5m/s up to 53dBA at a wind speed of 11m/s. At higher wind speeds, the sound of wind in the trees etc is supposed to mask turbine noise. (Not many leaves on the trees in winter!).

Sound levels at high wind speeds (49dBA at 9m/s) were just barely compliant.

Using methods of the CONCAWE* noise assessment protocol, predictions can be made for worst case scenarios. HBC concluded "that the predicted 49dBA level could be as high as 54dBA at the d'Entremont residence" under certain conditions.

*
Conservation of Clean air and water - Europe