Wind Turbine Syndrome affects more people than previously thought

English: Vestas V90 turbine hub

Vestas V90 Turbine - Image via Wikipedia

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
www.epaw.org
save.the.eagles@gmail.com

Sherri Lange  +1 416 567 5115 (Canada)
CEO, NA-PAW
www.na-paw.org
kodaisl@rogers.com

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.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Energy, wind power and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Wind Turbine Syndrome affects more people than previously thought

  1. More windfarm folly!!

  2. E.M.Smith says:

    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

    A more potent weapon under development in Russia since the early 1990s is a high powered very low frequency (VLF) modulator. Operating at frequencies below 20 KHz, the device requires a 1-2 meter dish to project a so-called “acoustic bullet.” The device was attractive because the power level is adjustable. At low power, the system would cause physical discomfort, while increasing the power could induce nausea, vomiting and abdominal pains. The highest levels can cause a person’s bones to resonate, which can be quite painful.

    New systems are being developed and evaluated by the US Army’s Picatinny Arseanal. The Aversive Audible Acoustic Device (A3D) is a highly directional device that can be hand-held or vehicle mounted. It directs an acoustic beam, which has tailorable intensity, and is used as a public address system, to focus on a specific individual or to deliver aversive sounds to alter a combatant’s behavior.

    And a bit flakier, but more interesting:
    http://journal.borderlands.com/1996/the-sonic-weapon-of-vladimir-gavreau/

    Tolerances from 40 to 100 cycles per second have been recorded by military examiners. The results are sobering ones. As infrasonic pitches decrease, the deadly symptoms increase. Altered cardiac rhythms, with pulse rates rising to 40 percent of their rest values, are the precursors to other pre-lethal states. Mild nausea, giddiness, skin flushing, and body tingling occur at 100 cycles per second. Vertigo, anxiety, extreme fatigue, throat pressure, and respiratory dysfunction follow. Coughing, severe sternal pressure, choking, excessive salivation, extreme swallowing pains, inability to breathe, headache, and abdominal pain occur between 60 and 73 cycles per second. Post exposure fatigue is marked. Certain subjects continued to cough for half an hour, while many continued the skin-flush manifestation for up to four hours.

    Significant visual acuity decrements are noted when humans are exposed to infrasounds between 43 and 73 cycles per second. Intelligibility scores for persons exposed, fall to a low of 77 percent their normal scores. Spatial orientation becomes completely distorted. Muscular coordination and equilibrium falter considerably. Depressed manual dexterity and slurred speech have been noted before individuals blackout. Just before this point, a significant loss in intelligibility is noted.

    The findings of Dr. Gavreau in the infrasonic range between 1 and 10 cycles per second are truly shocking. Lethal infrasonic pitch lies in the 7 cycle range. Small amplitude increases affect human behavior in this pitch range. Intellectual activity is first inhibited, blocked, and then destroyed. As the amplitude is increased, several disconcerting responses had been noted. These responses begin as complete neurological interference. The action of the medulla is physiologically blocked, its autonomic functions cease.

    This historical bit on Tesla and Samuel Clemens is amusing:

    Their mild use, for a minute, could be pleasantly stimulating. The effects invigorating the whole body for hours thereafter. Excessive use would produce grave illness however, excessive aggravations of the heart being the most dangerous aspect of the stimulation. The entire body “rang” for hours with an elevated heart rate and greatly stimulated blood pressure. The effects could be deadly.

    In one historic instance, Samuel Clemens, Tesla’s close friend, refused to descend from the vibrating platform. Tesla was sorry he had allowed him to mount it. After repeated warnings, Tesla’s concern was drowned out by both the vibrating machine and Clemens’ jubilant exaltations and praises. Several more seconds and Clemens nearly soiled his white suit, the effects of infrasound being “duly recorded”.

    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.

  3. Bloke down the pub says:

    And if they do sue it will probably be the tax payers who end up picking up the bill.

  4. John Marshall says:

    Wind farms are, in the extreme, government weapons used against their own people. Bit like Syria.

  5. tim in vermont says:

    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.

  6. Matthew W says:

    “This is considerably higher than what was found in previous studies conducted in Europe.”

    Maybe Aussies are just complainers???

    I KID !!!!!!!!

  7. AdolfoGiurfa says:

    @E.M.Smith: It should read 20 Hz instead of 20 KHz

  8. 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!

  9. jaymam says:

    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.

  10. Tom says:

    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.

  11. Brian H says:

    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.

  12. David Ramsbotham says:

    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.

  13. JLC of Perth says:

    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?

  14. Chris B says:

    I love the smell of smashed watermelons, hoisted on their own petards, in the morning.

  15. cui bono says:

    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!

  16. GogogoStopSTOP says:

    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.

  17. PaulH says:

    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?

  18. Peter Miller says:

    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.

  19. DAV says:

    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.

  20. ChrisH says:

    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.

  21. Pamela Gray says:

    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.

  22. DJL says:

    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.”

  23. Dodgy Geezer says:

    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….

  24. scott says:

    Health effects and wind turbines: A review of the literature
    http://www.ehjournal.net/content/10/1/78

  25. NucEngineer says:

    So, do off-shore windfarms affect fish, lobsters, and sea mammals?

  26. Tom Davidson says:

    I have no love for the Cuisinarts of the Air, but frankly the symptoms of Wind Turbine Syndrome (insomnia, headaches, nausea, stress, poor ability to concentrate, irritability, etc, leading to poorer health and a reduced immunity to illness) sound an awful lot to me like the same symptoms brought on by General Anxiety Disorder, such as precipitated by listening to the mass media:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001915/

  27. MarkW says:

    “Given the correct frequency and volume, LFN can cause involuntary sphincter relaxation.”

    THe mythbusters did an episode on this. The myth of the the “brown note” was busted.

  28. Interstellar Bill says:

    One thing we won’t get out of Hollywood is a loving account of a bird-loving activist who goes on a windmill-destruction binge, gets caught as a national hero, then is declared not guilty at a sensational trial.

  29. I am not so sure about all of this. How much is real and how much is conjured up. I can think of dozens of reasons one would have: “insomnia, headaches, nausea, stress, poor ability to concentrate, irritability, etc,” among them listening to warmest true believers. I know that LFN is real and can cause physical damage to structures under the right conditions. One is left to wounder if the LFN effects being discussed here are truly real or are they more like cell phone usage causing brain cancer? Where are the measurements?

  30. AdolfoGiurfa says:

    All countries which have installed windmills are importing energy, because its yield is too low and maintenance too high (several thousand of spare parts per 100 megawatts vs. A SINGLE moving part in hydroelectrics). How do we explain then its expansion all over the world and the fact that only politicians are its “fans”?

  31. AdolfoGiurfa says:

    There is a very common illness which afflicts only politicians, it is called by specialists:
    Wind Turbine Compulsive Buying Syndrome which, apparently is caused, by a new virus strain named “bribery-phagocytic” “BP”

  32. ChrisH says:

    It always amuses me how fast the pro-wind bloggers rally round to defend their beloved machines. Tom Davidson and DAV decry Wind Turbine Syndrome but, apart from Dr Pierpont’s carefully documented series there are hundreds of reports from all over the world describing the same set of symptoms. Most recently, Ambrose and Rand, two acousticians, went to investigate noise levels at a wind farm and, to their surprise, experienced exactly the same symptoms. Lots of people are suffering because these noisy machines are being sited far too close to human habitation.
    This study is a student dissertation, high quality science it is not, but it confirms, should it need confirming, that a high proportion of those living within 2km of wind turbines are adversely affected. Sleep disruption is the most common complaint and highest on the wish list of those affected was that the turbines should be turned off at night

  33. 1DandyTroll says:

    “Wind Turbine Syndrome affects more people than previously thought”

    The previous test was done in a safe padded environment, but in reality, greens go bonkers from the low frequency noise in their head and run around flapping their arms in crowded places amongst decent people. :p

  34. benfrommo says:

    Dennis Nikols, P. Geo. says:

    March 6, 2012 at 8:42 am

    I am not so sure about all of this. How much is real and how much is conjured up. I can think of dozens of reasons one would have: “insomnia, headaches, nausea, stress, poor ability to concentrate, irritability, etc,” among them listening to warmest true believers. I know that LFN is real and can cause physical damage to structures under the right conditions. One is left to wounder if the LFN effects being discussed here are truly real or are they more like cell phone usage causing brain cancer? Where are the measurements?

    There are careful studies that have shown that these LFN’s effect humans in this way. The article discusses them. There are many more out there, you just have to find them. These are studies that are done double blind with a control group of course. It is a side effect of the LFN’s.

    Not everyone has these side effects, but when subjected to the LFN’s a higher percentage of the population suffers the “insomnia, headaches, nausea, stress, et al” then normally. This goes to anyone else who doubts this is the case. I am not one for becoming over-alarmist, but the facts attest to this and one should always look at the facts and come to a conclusion.

    Is any of these symptoms life-threatening? Probably not. But they do hurt people and decrease productivity which needs to be taken into consideration. Too much of this will force people to move. Why should people be forced to move when putting up wind turbines should like every other power source be regulated so that the public well-fare is not hurt?

    That is the point here. That is the reason the EPA does have a safe guideline for LFN’s that has to be followed.

    The discussion here is whether that is enough and whether its enforced enough. The science is sound on this issue, and although being sceptical is good, why not bring some numbers back that doubt this to us?

    When the article explained how they came to these conclusions through experiments on humans, one would assume the best bet would be to come back with hard facts showing us that harm does not come from humans from these effects.

    Sure its possible it does not, but possible is not science. Science is true experiments with double blind experiments and a control group. If you are going to doubt the science behind something, you need to find fault with the science used and their application. Was the experiment set-up correctly?

    That is where you start, not just throwing doubt and obfuscation into a debate without reason.

  35. Ian W says:

    It would be interesting to assess the impact of multiple wind turbines. The VLF sound from a set of them could have very interesting peaks and troughs and beat frequencies. It will definitely not be a simple pattern. This means that attempts to deaden the sound may be thwarted by higher peaks and different frequencies.

  36. julie says:

    I am also concerned about what effect this may have upon cattle who have no ability to move off the farm.
    They can’t complain but it must affect them. I believe all cattle/animal farming should be prohibited within 5km of a windfarm.

  37. Rosco says:

    Wind problems have a different meaning in Australia – wind being the descriptive used to classify the problem Americans call “gas” – ie bowel emissions of the gaseous kind – not sure of the spectral range of frequencies accompanying same.

    At least wind farms don’t emit obnoxious odours – except when the burst into flames as witnessed in the UK not too long ago.

  38. julie says:

    In Tasmania, we have a windfarm which was granted approval with an Environmental Impact Statement that advised that less than one eagle a year would be killed by turbines.
    They’ve ADMITTED to killing 17 in the first three years.
    No, Greenies won’t come to the rescue of these endangered birds. Nor will government close these farms when they breach their consent conditions.
    Of course, if a mining company killed half that number the Greens would be pretending to be outraged.

  39. David Archibald says:

    There is a theory that the rise in the incidence of autism in the last couple of decades is associated with the overloading of babies’ brains by the white noise that we live with. If correct, it means that wind farms could result in a bitter harvest of autistic children.

  40. Jean-Paul says:

    What do our kind political masters, always so interested by animal welfare, think about the effects of Low Frequency Noise on marine animals, like fishes (over exploited, as everybody knows…), dolphins, whales, all kinds of seals, orcs, and maybe even (mind you!) endangered species like polar bears? After all, there are some wind turbines producing LFN in the North Sea now, and these past weeks, at least two big whales were seen dying on the beaches of Belgium and France. Was that the first visible effect of LFN on these highly “green” mammals?

  41. Mike Borgelt says:

    Fortunately when this societal madness passes the application of small amounts of C4 or thermite will remove most of the visual and sound pollution quickly.

  42. Chuckles says:

    If sonic warfare is the goal, the Japanese seem to be using a different approach

    http://www.news.com.au/technology/sci-tech/speech-jamming-gun-silences-people-mid-sentence/story-fn5fsgyc-1226287904238

  43. AdolfoGiurfa says:

    @Chuckles says:
    March 6, 2012 at 2:18 pm
    That´s sensational. It will solve ALL PROBLEMS!!!!. Can you imagine its applications?
    Perhaps there is already an APP, because it is only a matter of software.

  44. son of mulder says:

    I saw 5 wind turbines of various types on my travels today and they were all totally silent. Coincidently none of them was turning. I fail to understand how the electric train I was on was able to move at 100+MPH;>)

    “David Archibald says:
    March 6, 2012 at 1:14 pm

    There is a theory that the rise in the incidence of autism in the last couple of decades is associated with the overloading of babies’ brains by the white noise that we live with.”

    I heard a theory last week that it was caused by flame retardant chemicals.

    Next week it’ll probably the removal of lead from petrol;>)

    Or maybe the white noise is a metaphor for the Kafkaesque nature of the modern world ie ‘Marked by surreal distortion and a sense of impending danger.’. Now what does that remind me of?

  45. Dan in California says:

    I live downwind from the Tehachapi wind farms. Specifically, about 4 km from the nearest turbines, which are also the newest. I’m not sure which model they are, but I had lunch today and there were guys in Vestas jackets nearby working on new installations. I understand the human ear is not sensitive at 30 Hz, but I rarely hear any turbine noise. If the wind conditions are just right (maybe once a week) I can barely hear the older turbines’ gearboxes if I am outside my house. Frequently, I get really…….really…… tired of the wind noise though. Right now the wind is blowing around the cheap office trailer I work in.

  46. observa says:

    I must say I’ll remain a healthy skeptic on the disturbing frequency argument against windfarms-http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/study-plays-down-turbine-noise-fear/story-e6frea83-1226291251374
    Admittedly my anecdotal skepticism arises from the fact I’ve never heard of anyone getting paid to have them on their property suffering any such ill effects, but I’m certainly open to any examples you can produce to prove me wrong on that score.
    Besides I don’t need the vapours of schoolgirls or the ambulance chasers to convince me of the bleeding obvious-
    http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/7684233/the-winds-of-change.thtml

  47. observa says:

    Furthermore I’m not buying the argument that when my ancestors leapt upon one of Anthony’s ancector’s inventiveness not to mention that of the Ford family,etc in order to largely ditch the windmill, water wheel and horse, that they had rocks in their heads, but you lot can please yourselves about your ancestors.

  48. 1DandyTroll says:

    Dan in California says:
    March 6, 2012 at 3:06 pm

    “I understand the human ear is not sensitive at 30 Hz, but I rarely hear any turbine noise.”

    The general range is from 20Hz, but we’re all individuals, and even if most people have “frequency holes”, or what you call it over there, the direct noise is usually never the issues with low frequencies.

    Low frequencies are more felt directly then heard, but your neighbours complain of your new subwoofer anyway, which is because low frequencies travel and propagates through everything and when it does things starts to move, through vibrations, and thereby creating noise or just nausea. There’re some excellento american made subwoofers called SVSubs that suits the purpose of experimenting with below 20Hz, and then get some movies with very low frequencies recorded or go with the so called “healing” sounds and what not for franken frequencies.

    Simple experiment: Re-point your, perfectly, I hope, positioned, speakers from your listening position and notice how much sound you loose, and, worst case scenario, your neighbours gain. :p

  49. dave says:

    the problem is that the LFN is not measured in dBA, it is in dBC. 20 and 30 dBA as common noise is no big deal, unless you are trying to sleep. dBC is different. you will feel it as much as hear it. I’ve likened LFN to some heavy metal music playing in the car next to you. you can hear the lyrics (dbA) when your window is down. You close the car window and you no longer hear the music but feel (dBC) the beat.

    If they are getting LFN to register as 20-30dBA they are hurting.

  50. Mark says:

    Brian H says:

    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.

    I was wondering about transmission through the ground here. Has anyone tried putting seismometers near wind farms?

  51. David Cage says:

    The problem with the VLF is that it often is amplified in buildings rather than attenuated. The other misleading thing is the use of sound amplitude rather than sound pressure. Since one has a square law for distance the other has a linear one the use of sound level meters is a way of getting an acceptable reading well before the VLF sound is really insignificant in its effect.
    I know when the wind is a few degrees south of due west as I always wake up with a slight headache and dizziness although we are five miles from a group of smallish ones.

    We often hear of the effect of birds being killed in wind farms but I have noticed that starlings seem to avoid the areas in about a thirty degree arc either side of the line of the axis for nearly five miles and now alter their flypast areas according to wind direction where previously they always used the areas just west of us. There may of course be a different reason for this but why variable rather than just a total change of area?

  52. Michel says:

    Some typical data:
    For large wind turbines the typical wind tip velocity at maximal power is approx. 280 km/h (175 MPH).
    It’s like a Formula 1 racing car (without engine and tyres) passing at a distance of 5 m in front of a 3-10 m wide tower with a frequency between 0.2 and 1 Hz (12 to 60 times per minute).
    Maximal power is delivered with wind between 12 and 25 m/s. At 5 m/s only 5-8% of the designed power is delivered.
    The larger the turbine the less efficient it is at low wind speed.
    For fix blade turbines, power is delivered in proportion to the 3rd power of wind velocity (half the wind = 1/8 of power). With adjustable blades a better characteristic is obtained.

  53. Michel says:

    Michel says:
    March 7, 2012 at 1:52 am
    Some typical data:
    For large wind turbines the typical wind tip velocity at maximal power is approx. 280 km/h (175 MPH).
    ______________
    Sorry: please read wing tip velocity

  54. Solomon Green says:

    I have, for some time, been surprised that “The Great Wind Farm Scam” by Dr. John Etherington, retired Reader in Ecology at the University of Wales and former co-editor of the Journal of Ecology, does not appear in the margin at this site.
    Christopher Booker wrote the preface to the book, which was first published in 2009. My copy obtained in 2010 was the third reprint.
    The renewables lobby and their followers hate it and have attacked both the author and the book, but I have found it hard to locate any valid, substantial criticisms in their attacks. Perhaps some of your readers can point me to them.

  55. wgulden says:

    Observa – participants may have a hard time going public, either due to contractual obligations or to the reluctance of all of us to admit we made a mistake. One participant’s name that comes to mind is Hal Graham,

    http://www.mpnnow.com/news/x1393569912/Naples-hears-from-windmill-supporter-turned-opponent

  56. acckkii says:

    Noise is all around us. you say who can live near a chemical plant, refinery, airport, downtown traffic? Off course we do live everywhere, but we forget it unless it is the noise is from wind farms! The noise you are talking about is less than the noise from seaside waves. Seeking excuses?

  57. Brian H says:

    AKK! the Troll! Repetitive noise is SO much more irritating than randomly varying background …

  58. acckkii says:

    Brian H,
    Welcome back, good to see you again.
    I’m sorry but I have to say that I hate the randomly varying background noise same as you that don’t like the windmills noise. You are talking about “not to scale” measures, so I don’t understand your excuses.
    To find more about this Troll! Please live at a seaside villa wherever you like for just one month and see what you find. Please live nearby a refinery or chemical plant for a short time and see the steam and flares noises, or nearby an airport, a harbour, railway, mono rail, or if you live in an apartment at downtown just open your window and enjoy the noise of ambulances, police cars, fire fighters sirens, trucks and traffic and construction equipment all around you and say all are randomly varying background, these all are not harmonized symphony of Beethoven.
    Do you mind if I move the windmills outside the lands to offshore? What is your next comment? I’m sure this time you say Oh! The BIRDS! Seeking Excuses.
    I do agree with you that windmills make noise, any moving system makes noise in the atmosphere, and you can reduce the noise but never can eliminate it. For example in diesel combustion engines EU standards under existing technology specify allowable noise below 120db.
    I am familiar with such directives you are pointing out. Let me tell you; first windmills are bad second Solar Energy is bad third Silence….. It means STOP IT!?
    You are perfect Brian H. You never saw black smoky trains, but I did it, I traveled with these trains many times when I was a kid. Now you are perfect I am sure you would be the next Troll! Because now you are travelling with trains that are no longer perfect in the near future. Yes Brian H the Troll! Those smoky trains made the perfect trains today, windmills make noise? We have still tomorrow and other tomorrows.
    Noise is noise and if we are conservative magnifiers we would be losers. Gasoline price has raised up to 2 Euros a litre these days in EU. Let’s see what would happen tomorrow. GE made its 16000th wind turbines recently, 16000 Brian H, it is great experience. Let it provide us %1 of the total Electricity we need what would happen?
    Now I didn’t get you for honoring me the name the Troll! I welcome it and accept the good name from a gentleman, Brian H. Warm Regards.

  59. Brian H says:

    ACKK!!
    It’s gobsmacking to consider that your incoherent ranting might make sense even to yourself. The human species is indeed far more variegated than we can imagine.

Comments are closed.