Turbines too much of a gamble without all the facts

l22Wind-Turbine-GameNiagara This Week
The plan to build massive wind turbines in Wainfleet and West Lincoln has not gone over well with many of the people whose lives will be impacted the most — those who will live in the shadows of these giants. Residents have done their research, attended meetings, held rallies, written letters, staged protests and done everything but go along quietly with the plan.

The turbines, with almost 50 going on land in West Lincoln and another eight planned for Wainfleet, are a long-term deal. It seems each landowner who “hosts” a turbine will be compensated financially reportedly to the tune of about $1 million paid out over the project’s lifespan of 20 years.

But the neighbouring homes may see their value reduced because of the turbines’ presence. Now, this has been widely denied by those behind the projects but this has been the case in areas where turbines are already in place. Not to mention the potential health issues raised by people already living with wind turbines near their homes. The impact on the residents’ health is by far the most contentious of all the issues surrounding turbines — and the one upon which there seems to be no agreement.

Both the wind companies and our own provincial government deny there are any direct adverse effects and studies seems to back this — including the 2010 report from Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health which found there is “no scientific evidence of a direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.” Read article

4 thoughts on “Turbines too much of a gamble without all the facts

  1. Pingback: Hot! Hot! Hot! | WAINFLEET WIND ACTION GROUPWAINFLEET WIND ACTION GROUP

  2. Thank you Katherine! The first newspaper in the Niagara Region to actually state that there are problems with industrial wind wind turbines and that they do appear to create negative health and property value impacts.
    Incidentally, it has been suggested that King’s report was intentionally written with the word ‘direct’ (before causal) inserted at a later date to hide the fact that no one is denying that ‘indirect’ causal factors exist. The government and wind energy companies freely admit that some homeowners will suffer ‘noise’ pollution enough to disrupt their normal sleep pattern then equate this as no more than an ‘annoyance’ pure and simple because those affected don’t like IWTs. They still choose to ignore the fact that practically every health organization and government in the world accept long term sleep disruption as both a method of torture and a direct cause of several symptoms and illnesses. Strangely enough(???)many of the symptoms are those that ‘wind victims’ are suffering.
    And I think it’s in the next section of the same report specific recommendations made by King are being totally ignored by the wind energy companies and and never publicized in any media………..
    She refers to ‘..clumps..’ of 5 IWTs generating more ‘noise’ than single IWTs and states the Safe Set Back Distances should be increased where there are ‘clumps’…!!! I think it’s a huge leap from 1 to 5 and would suggest any valid engineering research and practices would likely point to a proportionately increasing distance for ‘clumps’ of 2,3 or 4 IWTs also?
    Again from an engineering perspective the distances almost certainly should relate to a manufacturer’s specifications??? I’m not an engineer, just trying to apply logic and common sense………. 🙂
    The Enercon 101s destined for West Lincoln and Wainfleet should be no closer than 750mtrs from each other for maximum efficiency. That would make any more than one at that distance apart, just two IWTs, a ‘clump’ under Arlene King, Ontario’s CMoH’s, own definition?
    The figures just don’t add up and make a complete nonsense of the wind energy companies claims that 550mtrs is even valid. They continue to play fast and loose, hiding behind the protection of Ontario’s Green Energy Act whilst showing a complete disregard for the known and growing negative impacts they know will be inflicted on the communities which they threaten.
    If you plan on doing any follow up articles I would suggest you might like to get anyone from the pro-wind lobby, politician, MoE bureaucrat, wind energy company rep, any one of them, and get them to show you the verifiable proof that industrial wind energy can offer a single benefit to Ontario or its citizens?
    Again, thank you. It would be nice to see some of our Regional politicians actually respond and tell their constituents and your readers why they don’t appear to have any problems with the way wind energy is being forced on rural communities and how they can justify the harm that is being done to those communities.
    Andrew Watts

  3. So how do the “Eco-Whackos” push the buttons to get politicians and and ordinary citizens to make questionable decisions…????
    Vivia Krause has a few thoughts…

    http://fairquestions.typepad.com/rethink_campaigns/about-the-author-vivian-krause.html

    At his web-site, Peter has a list of “Outrage Factors.” He explains that environmental activists make us feel angry because they systematically push our buttons by touching on a long list of factors that are well-known to infuriate or scare people. For example, successful environmental campaigns create powerful, memorable images (polar bears stranded on ice flows, for example), they bring about sustained, negative media attention (sea lice supposedly from salmon farms, for example), and they drive home the catastrophic potential and the impacts on future generations of whatever it is that they want the public to be upset about. The more I learned about the tactics that environmentalists use to raise the public mercury level, the more I wished that I had known all that when I worked in salmon farming. I could have done a much better job.

    Vivian is one of the people who research organizations like the David Suzuki cabal.

    She is worth following…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *