Science deniers in the wind industry

The human health consequences of manipulated measurements

Guest essay by Helen Schwiesow Parker, PhD, LCP

Like the tobacco industry before it, the wind industry has spent decades vehemently denying known harmful consequences associated with its product, while promoting its fraudulent feel-good image. Dismissing or denying the serious health impacts of industrial-scale wind turbines is wishful thinking, akin to insisting that tobacco is harmless because we enjoy it.

The problem with wind energy is not just its costly, subsidized, unreliable electricity; the need to back up every megawatt with redundant fossil-fuel power; or its impacts on wildlife and their habitats.

Infrasound (inaudible) and low-frequency (audible) noise (slowly vibrating sound waves collectively referred to as ILFN) produced by Industrial-scale Wind Turbines (IWTs) directly and predictably cause adverse human health effects. The sonic radiation tends to be amplified within structures, and sensitivity to the impact of the resonance increases with continuing exposure.

These facts have been known to the wind industry and the US government since the 1980s when it became a ‘hot topic,’ with numerous studies presented and published by acousticians working under grants from the Departments of Energy, Defense and NASA. The wind industry response?

Deny the science. Insist that “what you can’t hear can’t hurt you.” Claim that “neighbors will get used to it.” Measure only outside dwellings, and allow only noise measurements in the field that reflect the relative loudness perceived by the human ear, while drastically reducing sound-level readings in the lower frequencies that are known to cause problems.

From a distance, many view the massive turbines as majestic – as a clean, seemingly quiet and free source of endless energy. To untold thousands of families clustered within 2 kilometers (1.25 miles) or more of the pulsing machines, however, the IWTs bring strangely debilitating illness – increasingly incapacitating for some, yet scoffed at by wind proponents.

Common sense tells us that fifty-story-tall metal structures with blades as long as football fields moving at 180 mph at their tips would negatively impact quiet neighborhoods. But the extent and severity of the IWT’s effect on body, mind and spirit comes as a surprise to most people.

When I’m at home I’m usually sick with headaches, nausea, vertigo, tinnitus, anxiety, hopelessness, depression. My ears pop a lot and I hardly ever sleep…. Suicide looks to be my only relief. Land of the FREE Home of the BULLSHIT! … Million to one odds anybody contacts me back.”

The primary pathway of turbine assault on human health is no mystery. The Israeli army has used low-frequency sound pulses as high-tech crowd control for years. People are made nauseous and confused, with blurred vision, vertigo, headaches, tachycardia, heightened blood pressure, pain and ringing in the ears, difficulties with memory and concentration, anxiety, depression, irritability, and panic attacks.

This also describes the Wind Turbine Syndrome (WTS), a constellation of symptoms first given a name by the brilliant young MD/PhD, Nina Pierpont. She followed her astute and compassionate observations of turbine neighbors around the world with epidemiological research, using a robust case-crossover statistical design: subjects experienced symptoms that varied with proximity to the turbines. When the same subjects were placed at a greater distance from the turbines, their symptoms abated; returning them to the scene brought the symptoms back.

Michigan State University noise engineers explain that “Inaudible components [ILFN] can induce resonant vibration in liquids, gases and solids … bodily tissues and cavities – potentially harmful to humans.” A subject in the groundbreaking Cooper study describes how the resonance shows up in a glass of water on her kitchen table, and in the toilet bowl, and how she feels it in her body.

Pierpont hypothesized that a significant pathway from ILFN to symptoms might include disruption to balance mechanisms located in the inner ear.

Dr. Alec Salt and colleagues, otolaryngologists at Washington University, later found that inaudible ILFN reaches the brain via inner ear Outer Hair Cell (OHC) displacement, leading indeed to unfamiliar and disturbing sensations paralleling WTS.

As turbine size trends upward, the sickening ILFN emissions worsen. There’s a lot of money riding on keeping the science under the radar of public awareness, and regulations to a minimum.

When Denmark’s EPA proposed tightening turbine noise regulations to protect turbine neighbors from increasing ILFN (May 2011), the Vestas CEO wrote the DEPA Minister, asserting: “It simply isn’t technically possible to curtail the ILFN output,” and “Increased distance requirements [setbacks from residences] cannot be met whilst maintaining a satisfactory business outcome for the investor.”’ DEPA folded, turning instead to looser standards that were “likely to be copied by other countries.”

Although alerted to the increased endangerment of turbine neighbors around the world, the press remained silent, and Big Wind’s central players ramped up their game plan undeterred.

In addition to the impact of ILFN radiation, turbine neighbors suffer from Turbine “Flicker” – a strobe-like effect caused by turbine blades alternately blocking and allowing sunlight to skim rhythmically and repeatedly across the land, or ricochet in bursts across interior walls and stairwells.

The direct impact extends to nearly a mile from the turbine – long after sunrise, and again long before sunset. It is mesmerizing, disorienting, and often brings on nausea, dizziness, lightheadedness, irritability, even panic, indoors or outside.

Repetitive sleep disturbance and stress-related symptoms are the most common health complaints of IWT neighbors. The audible sound constantly fluctuates, described as akin to low-flying jets or the rumble of helicopters, “freakish, screeching sound sludge.” It is unnatural. People say the noise gets into your head, and you can’t get it out.

Advising the Falmouth, MA Board of Health, Dr. William Hallstein wrote: “All varieties of illnesses are destabilized, secondary to inadequate sleep: diabetic blood sugars, cardiac rhythms, migraines, tissue healing. Psychiatric problems intensify … all in the ‘normal’ brain. Errors in judgment and accident rates increase.”

As with seasickness, not everyone is similarly affected. But for many, the experience becomes literally intolerable. Devastated families and individuals around the world, having lost their health, jobs or farms, return their keys to the bank, sell their homes at fire-sale prices, or simply pack up and flee. Some never recover their health.

(For more details on this human health travesty, see my three-part series on MasterResource.org)

The continuing expansion of Big Wind is a tale of money and power shunting aside integrity and compassion, abetted by a disinterested news media, leading to an un-informed public, further betrayed by “human rights advocates” loathe to break ranks from popular positions.

The myth that “saving the world” requires tolerating the costs of Big Wind could not be further from the truth. Responsible stewardship demands critical thinking, common sense and grade school science, not just following Big Wind’s Pied Piper and supposedly good intentions.

In fact, allowing wind into the energy mix squanders our non-renewable environment and taxpayer billions that are greatly needed elsewhere, wasting them on the most idiotic of engineering conceits.

Reliance on wind actually increases emissions and fossil fuel use overall, due to inefficiencies introduced into the system. Big Wind eliminates none of the need for conventional capacity, but rather consumes vast quantities of additional fuel and raw materials, while spewing emissions during the manufacture, transportation, construction and maintenance of the enormous redundant turbines and their uniquely demanding infrastructure.

The Wind Game is nothing but an obscenely costly, mostly useless energy redundancy scheme. It funnels unimaginable profits from our taxpayer and rate-payer pockets to its inner circle, while knowingly ignoring its victims’ desperate pleas for relief – and indeed ridiculing them and trying to bury all the growing evidence of harm to their health and wellbeing.

We’ve witnessed three decades of this callous, mercenary assault, this arrogant denial of what is known to be true, this untold suffering of thousands of innocent victims around the world. It’s time to bring in the human rights and social justice referees – and call “game over.”


Helen Schwiesow Parker, PhD, is a Licensed Clinical Psychologist and a Past Clinical Supervisory Faculty member at the University of Virginia Medical School. Her career includes practical experience in the fields of autism, sensory perception, memory and learning, attention deficit and anxiety disorders, including panic disorder and PTSD.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

297 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Retired Kit P
March 9, 2017 8:17 am

“I wonder what the service life is for a commercial wind turbine?”

It depends on the price of natural gas. We are now seeing nuke plants that have spent the money to extend the license for 60 years, shut down ten years sooner.

Predictions are difficult, especially about the future.

rw
March 9, 2017 10:22 am

I still can’t believe there are people willing to defend wind turbines against these irrefutable health claims (which for me makes this a very interesting thread). Is this the sophist mind gone completely off the deep end? Since I haven’t seen these links posted yet, here they are (and there are many more like them):

https://stopthesethings.com/2016/07/01/wind-farm-noise-victims-sue-developer-noise-consultant-for-millions/

https://stopthesethings.com/2015/01/13/pac-hydros-cape-bridgewater-wind-farm-victims-to-be-told-what-they-already-know-turbine-noise-has-ruined-their-lives/

https://stopthesethings.com/2015/06/15/sa-farmers-paid-1-million-to-host-19-turbines-tell-senate-they-would-never-do-it-again-due-to-unbearable-sleep-destroying-noise/

Reply to  rw
March 9, 2017 10:49 am

Rw, the problem is these claims ARE refutable without proper underlying epidemiological studies. I don’t like wind turbines either for reasons stated above. Whining about as yet unproven speculative health effects is a very weak argument.

richardscourtney
Reply to  ristvan
March 9, 2017 11:12 am

ristvan:

You write

Rw, the problem is these claims ARE refutable without proper underlying epidemiological studies. I don’t like wind turbines either for reasons stated above. Whining about as yet unproven speculative health effects is a very weak argument.

Say what!?
These are the links rw presented which you are disputing.
https://stopthesethings.com/2016/07/01/wind-farm-noise-victims-sue-developer-noise-consultant-for-millions/

https://stopthesethings.com/2015/01/13/pac-hydros-cape-bridgewater-wind-farm-victims-to-be-told-what-they-already-know-turbine-noise-has-ruined-their-lives/

https://stopthesethings.com/2015/06/15/sa-farmers-paid-1-million-to-host-19-turbines-tell-senate-they-would-never-do-it-again-due-to-unbearable-sleep-destroying-noise/

Surely, you jest?
Or are you really trying to claim “proper underlying epidemiological studies” are needed to demonstrate that sleep deprivation has harmful health effects?

Richard

Griff
Reply to  ristvan
March 10, 2017 5:19 am

not to mention the widescale epidemiological studies in multiple countries showing no ill effects whatever.

rw
Reply to  ristvan
March 10, 2017 11:53 am

There’s probably no reason to add to what richardcourtney has said, but – the disconnect seems to be more widespread than I thought. In addition to sleep deprivation, how about getting hit on the head by a hammer, do we need epidemiological studies to verify that that isn’t healthy? I urge you to read the articles I linked to, and maybe read the article above again as well, since it in fact mentions epidemiological studies carried out by Nina Pierpont.

rw
Reply to  ristvan
March 10, 2017 12:07 pm

There is also the useful purgative that’s beginning to be provided by the courts. If this thing were simply a case of unsupported claims and neurotic symptoms, I don’t think the judicial outcomes would be so dramatically one-sided (nor would the companies be settling out of court on a regular basis; even big tobacco appears to have waged a more spirited defensive campaign than these people). (But I would agree that this too needs further checking; the courts are not perfect, either.)

catweazle666
Reply to  rw
March 9, 2017 3:40 pm

“I still can’t believe there are people willing to defend wind turbines against these irrefutable health claims”

People like Grifter will do anything if you cross theie palm with silver – forty pieces is I believe the going rate.

Griff
Reply to  catweazle666
March 10, 2017 5:18 am

I’m not paid, not a lefty, etc.

I wonder that the first recourse of the so called principled skeptic is always to make such accusations.

catweazle666
Reply to  Griff
March 11, 2017 6:20 pm

“I’m not paid, not a lefty, etc”

I don’t believe you.

“I wonder that the first recourse of the so called principled skeptic is always to make such accusations.”

Says the misogynistic hate-filled little liar who attempted to damage the professional reputation of Dr. Susan Crockford and Professor Judith Curry by asserting that they are paid to lie by the oil industry, and called all AGW sceptics who post on this blog “mad, stupid or paid for”.

Then you accuse others of lacking principles…

What a thoroughly nasty piece of work you are.

One of these days Skanky, one of these days…

alacran
March 9, 2017 11:18 am

Janice Moore, thank you for the Ozzie Z. link and your posts!
Fighting the windmill folly is a must wordwide!
In Germany the windmill-madness assumes disastrous forms!
The consequences of the Weibull distribution are simply not taken into account und the economic consequences are masked by subsidies and the priority access to the power-grids!
Without smoothing by (economic) storage we have a strong oscillation of power output, due to the poor physical efficiency of wind turbines. (and of course zero output for days with windstill ,and there is no economic storage with sufficient energy density in sight!)
A drop in wind speed of 50% (from 12m/s to 6m/s) results in a loss of 87,5% in energy output! Therefore , coal/nat.gas power stations must be in constant standby mode!
The result is resource waste instead of environmental protection! ( Quite apart from that bat and bird shreddering and driving local residents ill!)
It’s just a bad political subsidy matter in the fraudulent CAGW agenda of decarbonisation and the so called “Great Transformation”!
Though this be madness, yet there is method in it!

Janice Moore
Reply to  alacran
March 9, 2017 1:35 pm

Thank you, alacran! 🙂

Thank you for your excellent post full of facts about how foolish “investing” in wind power is.

Guessing that English is not your first language (since you talk about Germany at length, there) — wow! I admire you very much for your excellent communication ability.

jpatrick
March 9, 2017 5:30 pm

Many thanks for publishing this. This is the first I have heard of the sonic problems created by these windmills. I might have known better if I lived near a wind farm. Lots of food for thought. Far more than I can digest just now.

March 9, 2017 6:29 pm

What’s the feedback from Texas. From recent personal observation, they seem to be able to make it possible for the industry to actually function. I have not had the time to browse the relevant from the prattle. I have been swayed toward acknowledging significant economic justification in a widening set of circumstances. The bulk of what has been done in most circumstances, to date, has been criminal. Perhaps someone can summarize.

Reply to  David Michael Lallatin
March 10, 2017 4:33 am

“Texas. From recent personal observation, they seem to be able to make it possible for the industry to actually function.

Of course wind farms work for the owner, you get paid an annual figure to have the facility, a figure when you generate and the power is used, a figure when you generate and it is not used. Whats not to like?

But, the remainder of the power system has to be on standby to produce electric when you generators are not turning, the system has to fund 100% of the systems conventional generation even though YOU are being paid to produce electric when the wind blows.

From the system level, it is catastrophic!

Conventional generators are now uneconomic and closing.

Just look at S.Australia – blackouts, look at Germany with all generator capacity being split into two, one that makes money one that loses money.

Do you think this is sustainable?

No, but wind farm owners are making money so why worry, even in Texas…

Griff
Reply to  steverichards1984
March 10, 2017 5:16 am

“But, the remainder of the power system has to be on standby to produce electric when you generators are not turning”

No it does not… in the UK the wind is sufficiently predictable to allow fire up of generators only as the wind falls off as predicted. Increasing use of grid scale batteries will further ‘cushion’ this as they take up demand until the gas plant is fully spun up. Same solution in use in Eire.

You might note that the owner of a German windfarm is usually the local village/farmers/community.

u.k.(us)
March 9, 2017 7:18 pm

I live 2 miles from O’Hare airport, I’m running a youtube song, the furnace is running, the computer fan runs constantly.
I’m living in an environment full of sound waves.
Maybe it has driven me nuts enough to opine here.

Windmills are nothing but a cash-cow, politicians pretend they care, manufacturers get rich, and it all comes out of the taxpayers pocket.
What a waste of: time, treasure, skills, education…. (feel free to add to the list).

I’m used to the corruption in Chicago, but windmills are just too much.
Rant/

March 10, 2017 8:16 am

From the replies to my earlier comment, it doesn’t look like anyone has read the more recent engineering and cost breakdowns, nor the Texas laws and right-of-way powers that set the State to benefit far differently from the locations blighted by various Greens.

March 14, 2017 5:08 am

Alternative Energy and American Health and Safety – A Closer Look

One cannot have a conversation regarding American energy and environmental policy without discussing the issue of alternative energy and the overwhelming financial and regulatory support that alternative energy enjoyed from the previous administration.

On the topic of alternative energy, and particularly industrial wind turbines, perhaps the following should be considered by EPA Administrator Pruitt and Energy Secretary Perry. In our view, the concern of the Trump administration should be focused on the inappropriate siting of alternative energy installations and its impact on American health, safety and private property rights.

I believe that the following achieves the objective of controlling the inappropriate siting of industrial wind turbines, while embracing the protection of the health and safety, as well as the private property rights, of Americans who have been, or may be negatively affected by alternative energy installations sited too close to their neighborhoods and shorelines.

Our Recommended Approach

The EPA and the Trump administration should be committed to protect the health and safety, as well as the private property rights, of Americans who have been, or may be negatively affected by alternative energy installations sited too close to their neighborhoods and shorelines. The EPA and the Trump administration should be concerned with how ethics, transparency and accountability at all levels of government impacts the American people. The EPA and the Trump administration should share the view that government must embrace the highest levels of ethics and transparency when developing, adopting and implementing an energy and environmental policy that includes alternative energy and to be held accountable by and to the American people when the conduct of government does not meet this very high standard. And the EPA and the Trump administration need to understand how these commitments impact energy, environmental and tax policy.

Let’s take a closer look!

The Obama Administration’s Climate Action Plan

On June 30, 2015, I wrote an opinion piece titled “OBAMA CARBON PLAN MUST PROTECT AMERICANS FROM ALTERNATIVE ENERGY INSTALLATIONS.”

On March 12, 2015, the Obama administration posted on the White House website a report released that same day by the Department of Energy titled “Wind Vision: A New Era for Wind Power in the United States, which the White House described as “a highly anticipated analysis of America’s wind energy industry – charting the future of wind power through 2050 and underscoring the economic and environmental benefits that steady growth will make possible.”

https://www.White House.gov/the-press-office/2015/03/12/fact-sheet-wind-vision-report-highlights-long-term-benefits-investing-am

As those of us following the story know, the only way that this energy policy could even remotely be achieved is to construct, deploy and operate these industrial wind turbines in close proximity to our neighborhoods and shorelines. There is no other way. In reading this report, it is clear that the White House had no interest in, or intention of protecting the health and safety of those Americans negatively impacted by industrial wind turbines. This neglect is consistent with the challenges and frustrations that folks throughout the United States, including many in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, have experienced these past few years with their elected officials as it relates to inappropriately sited alternative energy installations.

I believe that the Trump administration and the EPA will do better!

The Production Tax Credit

In December 2015, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 extended the expiration date for this tax credit to December 31, 2019, for wind facilities commencing construction, with a phase-down beginning for wind projects commencing construction after December 31, 2016. The Act extended the tax credit for other eligible renewable energy technologies commencing construction through December 31, 2016. The Act applies retroactively to January 1, 2015.

The federal renewable electricity production tax credit (PTC) is an inflation-adjusted per-kilowatt-hour (kWh) tax credit for electricity generated by qualified energy resources and sold by the taxpayer to an unrelated person during the taxable year. The duration of the credit is 10 years after the date the facility is placed in service for all facilities placed in service after August 8, 2005.

The wind industry cannot survive without these tax credits. We as taxpayers are financing the installation of industrial wind turbines sited in close proximity to our neighborhoods and shorelines. This must stop.

In my view, the Trump administration and the EPA can immediately ask the Congress to design and adopt legislation to develop and implement retroactive national siting criteria for alternative energy installations. This will ensure the protection of the health, safety and property rights of Americans in communities hosting alternative energy installations by eliminating existing and future inappropriate siting of alternative energy projects

Additionally, there should have been no renewal of the tax credit for wind energy retroactive to January 1, 2015 and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, should be repealed.

R. de Haan
March 20, 2017 4:25 pm

Wind Industry…. that is exactly what it is. Wind Industry. We have a lot of “Wind Industry” these days. And it is not only limited to the manufacturing of wind mills.
Fact is that “Wind Industries” don’t contribute to the rise and well being of human civilization.

R. de Haan
March 20, 2017 4:47 pm

The fact that phenomina like “Wind Industry”, carbon taxes, eco taxes and all other related BS exist in the first place means we’re taken for a ride and no longer live in a free world.

Now we know how the clock is ticking, we can simply change that.

But for some reason we leave it all up to Trump and a few great souls of good will.

And watch how they are worn out and crushed.

In the mean time they poison our food with carcinogenic palm oil.

But that’s another story, not?

This isn’t about climate and therefore probably off topic.