by Mark Duchamp
A survey was conducted on wind farm noise as part of a Master’s dissertation by Zhenhua Wang, a graduate student in Geography, Environment and Population at the University of Adelaide, Australia. The results show that 70% of respondents living up to 5km away report being negatively affected by wind turbine noise, with more than 50% of them “very or moderately negatively affected”. This is considerably higher than what was found in previous studies conducted in Europe.
The survey was made in the vicinity of the Waterloo wind farm, South Australia, which is composed of 37 Vestas V90 3 MW turbines stretching over 18 km (1). These mega turbines are reported to be emitting more low frequency noise (LFN) than smaller models, and this causes more people to be affected, and over greater distances, by the usual symptoms of the Wind Turbine Syndrome (WTS): insomnia, headaches, nausea, stress, poor ability to concentrate, irritability, etc, leading to poorer health and a reduced immunity to illness.
The Danish government recognised recently that LFN is an aggravating component in the noise that affects wind farm neighbours. This prompted their issuing regulations that limit low-frequency noise levels inside homes to 20 dB(A). Unfortunately, as denounced by Professor Henrik Moller, they manipulated the calculation parameters so as to allow LFN inside homes to actually reach 30 dB(A) in 30% of cases. “Hardly anyone would accept 30 dB(A) in their homes at night”, wrote the Professor last month (2).
A summary of the Australian survey has been published (3), but the full Masters dissertation has not been made available to the public. In the interest of public health, the European Platform against Windfarms (EPAW) and the North-American Platform against Windpower (NA-PAW), have asked the University of Adelaide to release this important document.
A neighbour of the Waterloo wind farm, Mr Andreas Marciniak, wrote to a local newspaper last week: “Do you think it’s funny that at my age I had to move to Adelaide into my Mother’s shed and my brother had to move to Hamilton into a caravan with no water or electricity?” (4) Both Mr Marciniak and his brother have been advised by their treating doctors, including a cardiologist, to leave their homes and not return when the wind turbines are turning.
How many people will be forced to abandon their homes before governments pay attention, wonder the thousands of windfarm victims represented by EPAW and NAPAW. “It’ll take time to gather enough money for a big lawsuit”, says Sherri Lange, of NAPAW, “but time is on our side: victim numbers are increasing steadily.”
Contacts:
Mark Duchamp +34 693 643 736 (Spain) Skype: mark.duchamp
Executive Director, EPAW
Sherri Lange +1 416 567 5115 (Canada)
CEO, NA-PAW
References:
(1) – http://ecogeneration.com.au/news/waterloo_wind_farm_officially_opened/054715/
(2) – http://www.epaw.org/press/EPAW_NA-PAW_media_release_10Feb2012.pdf
(3) – http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/evaluation-of-wind-farm-noise-policies-in-south-australia/
(4) – Letter sent to the Editor of the Burra Broadcaster by Mr. Andreas Marciniak, windfarm victim.
Related articles
- Windfarm noise – Renowned acoustician denounces double standards in noise regulations (wattsupwiththat.com)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
More windfarm folly!!
Very low frequency sound has been used as a weapon. There ought to be plenty of research data on that. It started at least as early as Tesla.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/accoustic.htm
And a bit flakier, but more interesting:
http://journal.borderlands.com/1996/the-sonic-weapon-of-vladimir-gavreau/
This historical bit on Tesla and Samuel Clemens is amusing:
If nothing else, such military research information and the Tesla era testing ought to be usable for showing that the effect ought to have been expected and was “well known” for a long time.
And if they do sue it will probably be the tax payers who end up picking up the bill.
Wind farms are, in the extreme, government weapons used against their own people. Bit like Syria.
Seriously, before supporting wind farms, one ought to visit one, then the proposed site. I have. A four hundred foot all structure with a huge spinning blade, that is probably what drove Quixote out of his wits in the first place.
“This is considerably higher than what was found in previous studies conducted in Europe.”
Maybe Aussies are just complainers???
I KID !!!!!!!!
@E.M.Smith: It should read 20 Hz instead of 20 KHz
Given the correct frequency and volume, LFN can cause involuntary sphincter relaxation. I believe this occurred in a cinema when the producers attempted just a little too much reality in an earthquake scene. The law of unintended consequences!
I’m affected by low frequency noise at night from a generator 2 km away. In my view those who plan to install such noisy equipment should allow for compensating those who live within 5 km. Such compensation could be up to a third of the value of each property. Put that into the calculations of whether the installation is viable.
In Portugal courts have decided to stop wind turbines, because of impact on a little boy:
(Google translated)
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pt&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fecotretas.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F07%2Fruido-das-eolicas.html
Ecotretas
If you call 3MW a ‘mega-turbine’ think again. Design consultancies don’t get out of bed for less than a 5MW design these days and most stuff is in the 6, 7 or 10MW class, though admittedly mostly offshore.
The claimed “insulation” that is installed to “mitigate” the effects is a joke. You can’t insulate against such low frequencies without a huge mass in between, and even then it’s problematic. Elephants use infrasound for long distance communication (through the ground) for a reason.
Wind power – what a joke! Yet another good reason to object to them. Are you disillusioned by rising electricity prices, over dependence on the “green” dream [especially uneconomical and inefficient wind farms] and the destruction of our countryside then please register your objection at
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22958
or by googling “petition 22958” and following the link.
Caveat: I’m not a scientist, just an interested lay person.
It would be interesting to find out whether the noise and vibration of wind turbines have negative effects on other species, some of which have more acute hearing and other senses than we do. Wind turbines have the obvious negative effect of killing birds and bats but I’m thinking of effects that are a little more subtle than that, such as animals moving away from areas where wind turbines operate.
Does anybody know if studies have been done of the effects of wind turbines on local wildlife?
I love the smell of smashed watermelons, hoisted on their own petards, in the morning.
David Ramsbotham says (March 6, 2012 at 5:22 am)
Thanks for the link David. I signed.
To all: surely the EPA in the US and other agencies in Europe have guidelines on LFN? I’d love to see the EPA suing renewable energy companies, or closing down windfarms!
I’d just like to remind everyone of the Second Law of Thermodynamics: ‘Nothing is free;’ ‘if something seems to good to be true, it’s false;’ ‘all good things must come to an end;’ ‘nothing ventured, nothing gained…’
The Liberal thought that we have missed a generous gift of Mother Nature in free wind power is nothing but fantasy. Turbines require vast, excess pollution due to the mining of Neodymium magnetic material, gear boxes fail daily, wind is either too heavy or too light for wind farms to be reliable, offshore footings are failing, subsidies are excessive, LFN causes nausea, raptors are massacred, bat’s are smashed, etc, etc.
No power is expense free… get too close to the warmth of the campfire & your eyes burn & you smell like soot… gasoline vapor is toxic, gas ovens better light or you can get yourself suffocated… nothing is free.
Give me a finely tuned gas engine any day, a nuclear power generator, a coal fired electric generator… I know what I pay for & it’s not free, but it’s reliable, unsubsidized & inexpensive.
I am no fan of these silly windmills, but symptoms of “insomnia, headaches, nausea, stress, poor ability to concentrate, irritability, etc,” sound awfully non-specific. Doesn’t everyday living cause these problems?
Wind power versus nuclear power.
Only the most stupid, science-challenged, econut would choose wind over nuclear – please stand up the governments of the UK and Germany.
I never knew about the problem of low frequency sound being yet another problem with wind power, some of the others being:
Unreliability – too much or too little wind, plus a lot of maintenance required.
Unsightly – ruins the landscape
Expensive – possibly the highest capital cost – by a long way – per kilowatt hour of generation.
Back up – needs back up of another power source, such as a gas fired power station.
Grid problems – fluctuating electricity supplies into national grids causes huge current stability problems.
Life: Much shorter than stated by the manufacturers – even the EU admits this.
Benefits – only to those enjoying the insanely high subsidies paid by government.
Well, UK prime minister David Cameron thinks wind power is great, so that’s all right then.
I’m willing to bet there have been some bad stats used here.
When I was in school, I lived above a railroad track that was frequented by long freight trains chugging up a rather steep (for a railroad) grade. The whole apartment building would shake. Sometimes this would go on all night. Strangely, after a while, I didn’t even hear them.
Wind turbines are expensive toys and shouldn’t be subsidized. They’re ugly to boot. This paper, though, looks like the piling-on of the secondhand smoke kind and builds on the solidarity of thirdhand alcoholism sufferers. “ …usual [!] symptoms of the Wind Turbine Syndrome (WTS): “insomnia, headaches, nausea, stress, poor ability to concentrate, irritability, etc, leading to poorer health and a reduced immunity to illness.” Gosh, they left out impotency! This list can be used everywhere! I’m willing to bet that everything said in this paper is equally true of residents living close to major highways, airports, elevated trains, steel mills, power lines, high schools, kindergartens and churches.
The paper starts with the assumption of negative effects and probably should be relegated to the case files of bad models. WUWT would be better off leaving out this kind of silliness and stick with arguments that have merit. “Wind Turbine Syndrome,” indeed. Gimme a break.
JLC of Perth. See Pearce-Higgins et al 2009 Journal of Applied Ecology. 46:1323-31. 7 of 12 bird species made themselves scarce around turbines. There are anecdotal reports that moles make themselves scarce, probably the LFN.
I’m more concerned for the human neighbours whose sleep is disturbed and whose lives and health are being ruined.
Sounds that are irritating are made more so by the context of the sound. Rural areas are populated by folks who must find a way to live within their means. And they HATE waste. So here comes a humming sound that with every turn, is sucking money out of their pockets. Money that would ordinarily be going INTO their pockets if it were not for the climbing prices of energy. The wheat in those fields can’t WALK to the grainery.
The low menacing growl of wind turbines may one day become the sweet musical sound of Democratic footsteps leaving state and federal buildings everywhere.
Brian H says:
March 6, 2012 at 5:08 am
The claimed “insulation” that is installed to “mitigate” the effects is a joke. You can’t insulate against such low frequencies without a huge mass in between, and even then it’s problematic. Elephants use infrasound for long distance communication (through the ground) for a reason.
Also, the US Navy uses an ELF (Extremly Low Frequency 40-80Hz) Communications for submarines:
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/c3i/elf.htm
“The degree to which a signal is attenuated depends on its frequency, however. The lower the frequency, the more deeply a signal can be received in sea water.”
Wind power appears to damage humans.
That’s fine. According to environmentalists, humans are not wanted on the planet, and any damage to them is fine in Greenpeace’s book.
But has anyone done any research into the effect of turbines on other species? Preferably a rare species that’s about to go extinct anyway?
If we can find that the lesser spotted flycatcher alters its mating behaviour when bombarded with low-frequency noise, then there will be a huge outcry from the activists, who will be listened to. As opposed to just from the members of the public, who can be ignored….