18 September 2013

Wind turbine syndrome: farm hosts tell very different story

| johnboy
Join the conversation
95
wind turbines

By Simon Chapman

People who host wind turbines on their properties and derive rental income from wind energy companies have important stories to tell about living alongside turbines, but they’ve largely been absent from the debate on wind farms and health. Australian filmmaker and researcher Neil Barrett is finally giving this critical group a voice in his new short film, The way the wind blows, released today.

In Barrett’s short film, 15 hosts and some of their neighbours from the central Victorian district near the town of Waubra tell what it’s like to live surrounded by large turbines.

Turbine hosts at Waubra earn A$8,000 a year for each turbine on their land. In the bush, the expression that wind farms can “drought-proof a farm” is common: a land owner with ten turbines can wake up each morning comfortable in the thought that a tough year with poor rain or bad frosts can be ridden out, thanks to income from wind generation.

All of Barrett’s interviewees say they can hear the turbines but none say they are bothered by them or suffer from any health problems they attribute to the turbines. If there is such a phenomenon as “wind turbine syndrome” it would seem it is a condition that, remarkably, can be prevented by the wonder drug called money.

Significantly, too, none of those interviewed say their contracts prevent them from speaking publicly about their experiences with hosting turbines, repudiating the mantra of wind farm opponents that suffering hosts are gagged from speaking out by evil wind companies.

In 2010, a small group comprising mostly wealthy landowners established the Waubra Foundation, which opposes wind farms being established near their country estates. None of the directors of the foundation nor its chief executive, an unregistered former GP Sarah Laurie, live within 125km of Waubra, yet took on the name of the town to highlight what they believe are serious health problems associated with living near wind turbines.

Barrett’s film reveals the deep resentment that Waubra residents feel about these out-of-towners hijacking their town’s good name. None say that Laurie has ever contacted them, with one commenting, “I wouldn’t give them the time of day if they turned up here.”

Laurie and the Waubra Foundation have done all they can to spread concern about the harms they allege are caused by living near wind farms. One former Waubra resident has been particularly prominent, speaking emotionally at anti-wind farm meetings about how wind farms have ruined his health and caused his family to move to Ballarat, at great personal expense.

In a statement that would be of immense interest to Apple, Samsung and Nokia, he recently told a meeting in Barringhup that electricity generated by wind turbines started charging his cell phone without it being plugged in:

I’ve had my … mobile phone go into charge mode in the middle of the paddock, away from everywhere.

Turbine hosts at Waubra earn A$8,000 a year for each turbine on their land. Image from shutterstock.com

In 2012, he wrote a public submission to a parliamentary inquiry where he revealed he had suffered a serious head injury some eight years before the wind farm opened in 2010:

I have been in brain training care and rehabilitation for about ten years because of an unfortunate, unrelated accident.

Indeed, the most common health complaints voiced by complainants are problems such as disturbed sleep, anxiety, hypertension and normal problems of ageing that are very prevalent in all communities, regardless of whether they have wind farms.

In a 2012 Ontario legal case, complainants were asked to provide their medical records going back a decade before the local wind farm commenced operation. This would have provided relevant information about any pre-existing health problems. When they failed to so, their case failed.

In a peer-reviewed paper of mine to be published shortly, I conducted an historical audit of all known health and noise complaints made about Australia’s 51 wind farms from 1993 to 2012. Using four sources (wind company records, submissions made to three parliamentary enquiries, local media monitoring records and court affidavits) I calculated the number of complainants around Australia.

More than two-thirds of Australian wind farms including more than half of those with large turbines have never received a single complaint. Two whole states – Western Australia and Tasmania – have seen no complaints.

Of the 129 individuals across Australia who have ever complained, 94 (73%) are residents near just six wind farms which have been targeted by anti wind farm groups.

Almost all (98%) of complainants made their first complaint after 2009 when anti wind farm groups began to add health concerns to their wider opposition. In the preceding years, health or noise complaints were rare despite large and small-turbine wind farms having operated for many years.

In late 2012, anti-wind farm campaigners launched an anonymous website, Stop These Things. The apparently well-funded site specialises in emotive videos of wind farm victims, but in nine months has only run profiles of 18 mostly aged complainants. Barrett’s film profiles nearly that number of people telling a very different story.

Image from shutterstock.com

Anti-wind farm activists have promoted a bizarre and ever-growing number of health problems associated with turbine exposure. My favourite is the alarming problem of disoriented echidnas.

Among Laurie’s more interesting claims is that wind turbines cause lips to vibrate at up 10 kilometres, and that within 1km to 2km of wind turbines, air pressure changes occur “sufficient to knock them off their feet or bring some men to their knees when out working in their paddock” and “have been reported by farmers to perceptibly rock stationary cars”.

Laurie has repeatedly claimed that “a large number” or “over twenty families” and most recently “more than forty” families are “wind farm refugees” who have had to abandon their homes. But Laurie has declined requests to make her list public.

Another prominent activist George Papadopolous, claims to be able to sense a wind turbine at 100km away: from Sydney’s CBD to Lithgow, as the crow flies.

Barrett’s film brings a fresh and important perspective to a debate that has so far been dominated by a small number of complainants and those oxygenating their fears.

Fifteen years ago, Australian news media ran countless stories on community fears about mobile phone towers. Those still worrying about health risks from the towers are rare today. Wind turbine syndrome is likely to go the same way.

Simon Chapman AO receives no financial or other material support from any company or person in the wind energy industry or agents acting on their behalf.

The Conversation

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

Join the conversation

95
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/5046460?WT.trc=Social%20Campaigns&WT.mc_id=Innovation_News-RadioNational-TheWorldToday|Hold%20The%20Phone%20Perth%20Girls%20School%20Bans%20Mobiles_FBP|abc

Wind farms are one of the few sources of impacts to birds and bats that are being systematically monitored. Most other forms of energy generation do not monitor impacts. Nor do we have widespread systematic monitoring of all the other human-related activities that we inflict on species—such as collisions with cars, powerlines, windows, poisoning, shooting, pollution, etc.

Unfortunately in the area of wind farms there is a lot of misinformation and myths, even when scientific evidence exists. Inaccurate information or myths do not progress understanding or, in fact, save species. In my view it only muddies the water, distracts focus and wastes time.

breda said :

Robertson – I see that you’ve been called in to help.
You then go on to repeat the meme that anyone who disagrees with you is either deranged or in the pay of Big somethingorother.

You yourself called it “Big Wind” in post #33:

breda said :

Perhaps the pro-Big Wind sites need updating.

Why are you squandering your burden of proof? If we don’t believe you, it’s not our problem, it’s *yours*.

watto23 said :

When it comes down to it, plonking a coal plant will upset a lot more people and will make the health of more people sick.

People who oppose Wind or Solar plants should be sent to live in the area around the Latrobe Valley.

Such wonderful memories as a kid.

Dirty brown coal power stations, huge open cut mines. The glow of the Logford gas plant flame at night and the steam from Loy Yang visible at day. At least it made it easy to navigate the flat featureless plains. Of course the pollution and radiation from the coal plants wasn’t great but on the plus side the cooling ponds meant you could swim in lovely warm water all year round even if they did create incredible fog in winter.

I hear Peter Jackson was going to use the Latrobe Valley for Mordor except it was too unpleasant and his orcs were scared to enter Moe.

People complaining about solar or wind plants seems a bit like someone who has stubbed their toe demanding a disabled parking space. They should go to the RSPCA to get a dose of concrete and harden up.

watto23 said :

However if the concerns are of financial in nature, well I can understand that, but even then i bet there would be plenty of people happy to live in some of the rural properties within 8kms of a wind farm. I know it wouldn’t be something that concerned me.

Indeed, I was recently told that land zoned Environmental in Eurobodalla could “not be sold at any price”. A triumph of hyperbole over fact – I’d love to buy some cheap land near the South Coast of NSW. And so would many tree- and sea- changers for whom the Environmental zoning would be a boon, because it means the next door blocks are less likely to be developed. So there may even be a positive effect on property prices, the real estate agents just need to target a different market. So too with windfarms – let the anti-environmentalists move to the Hunter to live in coal dust, and the rest of us can buy their properties at market value to farm on (exploding sheep and cows killed by plummeting dead parrots notwithstanding).

IP

breda said :

” But Yass Landscape Guardians spokesman Mark Glover says 180 residents within eight kilometres of the turbines are unimpressed.

”I think most people just laughed at the suggestion, quite frankly. At the end of the day what do you want, to knock $5 off your electricity bill or to knock 30 per cent off the value of your home?”

Are you saying that these people are all deranged, or in the pay of Big (fill in the blank)?

It is precisely this kind of superiority complex that lost your lot the election. Keep it up, please. Every day, you alienate more average punters.

The issue is not all the problems outlined are caused by wind turbines, they are just a handy excuse. Those that are genuine complaints get lost amongst those on the bandwagon. And yes some of it is caused by oil/coal sympathetic people. There is no easy way of determining what is actually caused by the turbines, what is caused by people worrying about the turbines.

When it comes down to it, plonking a coal plant will upset a lot more people and will make the health of more people sick.
However if the concerns are of financial in nature, well I can understand that, but even then i bet there would be plenty of people happy to live in some of the rural properties within 8kms of a wind farm. I know it wouldn’t be something that concerned me.

breda said :

”I think most people just laughed at the suggestion, quite frankly. At the end of the day what do you want, to knock $5 off your electricity bill or to knock 30 per cent off the value of your home?”

Are you saying that these people are all deranged, or in the pay of Big (fill in the blank)?
.

I think the $5 off your electricity bill quote speaks for itself – deranged, or at least deluded or deceived (by someone who is in the pay of Big Coal, even if they themselves aren’t).

IP

beardedclam said :

Russ said :

You can go and quote all the so called “scientific” studies all you like (most likely commissioned and paid for by Big Wind) but answer me this: why is it that all pictures of wind turbines *never* show the ground directly beneath the turbine? Every shot has the camera subtly tilted up for “some reason”. Even the feature pic in this post has used fog to obscure the feathered carnage.

hahahaha HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, because in this picture, if the fog wasnt there, you would be able to see what was sitting under the windmills. Mate, i put my money that if an elephant was riding a tricycle beneath the windmill holding a 20 foot neon sign saying “there are dead birds here”, you still wouldnt be able to see it.

As a former mole in the Green movement, I feel I can finally go public with an explanation of the dead bird issue.
We used to sneek about under the turbines at night, collecting the bird carcasses and would place them in barrels of un-refined oil.
This preserved the carcasses while they were in storage in an un-disclosed location near an international airport.
Then, the moment news broke of the latest Exxon Valdez / Deep Water Horizon oil spill, the birds were loaded onto a Stelth bomber and dumped over the nearest coast line where the local Greens operatives would “find” them the next morning and hold them up limply by one wing while, in tears, condemning the fossil fuel industry and advoocating “Green” power.

breda said :

Robertson – I see that you’ve been called in to help.

You might start by looking at the video I posted on page 1 – sorry to remind you that before being parachuted into a debate from outside, you need to do your homework. You just parrotted something from a factsheet without bothering to find out what the question is.

You then go on to repeat the meme that anyone who disagrees with you is either deranged or in the pay of Big somethingorother.

Here’s the thing. People like the guy in the video and others who have been living happily in the country are saying that windfactories are making their lives worse.

Your response is to claim that they are nutters or being paid by some sinister organisation. Because shut up.

Mind if I set up a strobe light outside your living room? I’ll just do it intermittently, unpredictably, because that makes it OK.

Probably trespass…….

breda said :

Are you saying that these people are all deranged, or in the pay of Big (fill in the blank)?
.

Depends – do they have issues with exploding herds of goats, incontinence, and sleep deprivation caused by wind turbine sound travelling 100km?

If so, then, yes, they are either nutters or mischief-makers.

@ Robertson

“I think the issue of crank magnetism is well worth bringing up – there aren’t many people who share Breda’s irrational fear of wind turbines and don’t also adhere to the crank line of reasoning on fluoridation, homeopathy, vaccination, and the sending of children to anti-educational theosophist institutions.”
———————————————————————–
You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel here. For the record, I support fluoridation, despise homeopathy, support vaccination and am not quite sure what the last thing means.

Here is another bunch of freaks and nutters (according to you):

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/power-games-why-incentives-wont-sway-these-wind-farm-opponents-20130920-2u5r5.html

” But Yass Landscape Guardians spokesman Mark Glover says 180 residents within eight kilometres of the turbines are unimpressed.

”I think most people just laughed at the suggestion, quite frankly. At the end of the day what do you want, to knock $5 off your electricity bill or to knock 30 per cent off the value of your home?”

Are you saying that these people are all deranged, or in the pay of Big (fill in the blank)?

It is precisely this kind of superiority complex that lost your lot the election. Keep it up, please. Every day, you alienate more average punters.

IrishPete said :

Robertson said :

breda said :

IP

What makes you think I’m a “she”? Do you have some inside information, or is it just that you assume it to be so?

Ah, yes, when losing an argument, throw in a big red herring.

Meanwhile, you haven’t answered whether you:
– send your children to Orana
– have had them vaccinated

to be fair, I think the first question is a bit personal, and could result in Breda or his/her children being identified. Especially if you go looking for a Dutch-sounding surname.

Second question is a bit less identifiable, but still a bit personal and I would defend Breda’s right to decline to answer it.

Let’s all remember to play the ball and not the wo/man.

IP

I think the issue of crank magnetism is well worth bringing up – there aren’t many people who share Breda’s irrational fear of wind turbines and don’t also adhere to the crank line of reasoning on fluoridation, homeopathy, vaccination, and the sending of children to anti-educational theosophist institutions.

davo101 said :

IrishPete said :

breda said :

IP

What makes you think I’m a “she”? Do you have some inside information, or is it just that you assume it to be so?

Because it’s a female name? http://www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/0/Breda
Perhaps you didn’t know.

IP

I’m with IP here. I’d just been reading it as one of the many variants of Bridget.

It never occurred to me that it was anything but a reference to the town in the low countries.

Robertson said :

breda said :

IP

What makes you think I’m a “she”? Do you have some inside information, or is it just that you assume it to be so?

Ah, yes, when losing an argument, throw in a big red herring.

Meanwhile, you haven’t answered whether you:
– send your children to Orana
– have had them vaccinated

to be fair, I think the first question is a bit personal, and could result in Breda or his/her children being identified. Especially if you go looking for a Dutch-sounding surname.

Second question is a bit less identifiable, but still a bit personal and I would defend Breda’s right to decline to answer it.

Let’s all remember to play the ball and not the wo/man.

IP

breda said :

IP

What makes you think I’m a “she”? Do you have some inside information, or is it just that you assume it to be so?

Ah, yes, when losing an argument, throw in a big red herring.

Meanwhile, you haven’t answered whether you:
– send your children to Orana
– have had them vaccinated

IrishPete said :

breda said :

IP

What makes you think I’m a “she”? Do you have some inside information, or is it just that you assume it to be so?

Because it’s a female name? http://www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/0/Breda
Perhaps you didn’t know.

IP

I’m with IP here. I’d just been reading it as one of the many variants of Bridget.

Innovation said :

IP – Perhaps your assumption was founded on your subconscious memory ……..

Well there you go. I wonder why she would deny it? Perhaps in Tony Abbott’s Australia is it once again a bad thing to be female.

IP

Innovation said :

IP – Perhaps your assumption was founded on your subconscious memory ……..

And is Pete short for Peta or Peter 😉

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)? No, they’re a little extreme for me.

I’ve never seen or heard Peta abbreviated to Pete, but then I’d never come across the name Peta until I came to Australia. And it’s amazing how Ozzie-born people can pronounce Peter and Peta identically. I used to work with a Peta and it cause significant confusion.

IP

I assumed breda was a deliberate wrong spelling of Breeder, and a witty commentary on people who call themselves tuggeramum or similar.

Silly silly moi!

IP – Perhaps your assumption was founded on your subconscious memory ……..

And is Pete short for Peta or Peter 😉

breda said :

IP – in fact, it’s the name of the town where I was born.

But you have never been one to let boring facts get in the way of your assumptions.

au contraire, but never mind.

I guess if you’d called yourself Sheila I still shouldn’t have assumed you were female. How silly of me.

Australia has millions of people with Irish ancestry to whom Breda would be a female name, but probably not very many with a connection to the Dutch city of Breda (yeah, there are many people with Dutch ancestry, but they would hardly call themselves “breda” unless they were born there or descended from people who were), which I assume is where you are referring to, unless there’s some small Australia place that I can’t find. But there I am introducing boring facts again.

Perhaps I should also be inferring something from the fact that your RiotACT name starts with a small b.

And now I am really intrigued why someone born in the Netherlands would be so anti-windmill.

IP

IP – in fact, it’s the name of the town where I was born.

But you have never been one to let boring facts get in the way of your assumptions.

breda said :

IP

What makes you think I’m a “she”? Do you have some inside information, or is it just that you assume it to be so?

Because it’s a female name? http://www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/0/Breda
Perhaps you didn’t know.

IP

The issue with windfarms and proving they cause no harm to the people nearby, is finding a way to show that a person living near a windfarm with no knowledge of the windfarm has no ill affects. Of course the problem is thats next to impossible, because the people who oppose windfarms, has already told everyone its bad for them…..

Its like a lot of the vitamins and supplements available from health food stores. Many have absolutely no medical proof they do anything, yet people take them and swear its helped them. Yet studies show with many supplements, if a person believes its going to help them, any pill actually works.

There is only one current valid reason I can accept as opposing windfarms and thats a financial one, because they may very well decrease the value of land nearby, but it may also increase the value if the land is in a high wind area also.

IP

What makes you think I’m a “she”? Do you have some inside information, or is it just that you assume it to be so?

Robertson said :

IrishPete said :

Save the Planet or no flicker effect. Hmm… I think I’ll Save the Planet. Thanks for asking.

*Please* don’t perpetuate Breda’s malapropism: “flicker effect” is an issue involving power distribution.

What she is really talking about is “shadow flicker”.

We all know what she means, there is no need to be pedantic.

IP

IrishPete said :

Save the Planet or no flicker effect. Hmm… I think I’ll Save the Planet. Thanks for asking.

*Please* don’t perpetuate Breda’s malapropism: “flicker effect” is an issue involving power distribution.

What she is really talking about is “shadow flicker”.

breda said :

Robertson – I see that you’ve been called in to help.

Paranoid conspiracy theories? Check!

breda said :

You might start by looking at the video I posted on page 1 –

Anecdotes are not data.

breda said :

sorry to remind you that before being parachuted into a debate from outside, you need to do your homework.

Oh, was I not invited to your “debate” on your RiotAct website?
I’m so sorry to intrude here on this, your personal private space.

breda said :

You just parrotted something from a factsheet without bothering to find out what the question is.

And you are just parroting some paranoid conspiracy theories devised by cranks and industry spin-merchants.

Unless *you* live next to a wind turbine, of course…?

breda said :

You then go on to repeat the meme that anyone who disagrees with you is either deranged or in the pay of Big somethingorother.

Please quote me anywhere I said that?
Plenty of people disagree with me merely because they are wrong, not nutters.

Your anti-windfarm crankery, on the other hand, is clearly well into the realm of complete and utter nuttery.

breda said :

Here’s the thing. People like the guy in the video and others who have been living happily in the country are saying that windfactories are making their lives worse

.

…and – at best – they have no facts to back up what they say. When they produce stuff they claim to be “facts”, it turns out they are fantasists and liars.

breda said :

Your response is to claim that they are nutters or being paid by some sinister organisation. Because shut up.

No, my response is they are hysterics, justifying their behaviour with lies.

breda said :

Mind if I set up a strobe light outside your living room? I’ll just do it intermittently, unpredictably, because that makes it OK.

How is the sun setting behind the blades of a wind tower in any way “intermittent” or “unpredictable”?

What planet are you from?

So long as you keep typing irrational nonsense that is clearly at odds with reality, you will not be taken seriously.

PS – do you send your children to Orana? Have you vaccinated them?

grunge_hippy9:14 pm 19 Sep 13

this video was far more entertaining than that british twat rabbiting on…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2x7u4GAqPc

They’re right, wind is evil, and not just the kind emanating from my Heinz-fuelled posterior.

http://www.theonion.com/video/in-the-know-coal-lobby-warns-wind-farms-may-blow-e,20876/

IP

breda said :

Still waiting on the response to the flicker effect. Saying things like “it was a pretty poor disco” and “oh, well, who knows how many days of the year it happens” doesn’t cut it. I wonder if those posters would be happy to have that effect foisted on their living areas in the name of Saving the Planet?

And, while calling people who disagree with you crazy or hysterical has a long history, it is not a distinguished one.

The fact is, low frequency noise, like all external stimuli, affects different people differently. Some people sleep dreamlessly through loud music with lots of bass, others find it intolerable. It doesn’t have any moral connotation, nor does it reflect the mental health of those involved.

Refusing to accept that wind turbines can affect the quality of life of people who live close to them on the grounds that they are crazy or neurotic just demonstrates a determination to value ideology over people.

What’s the point of trying to carry on an evidence based, mature conversation with someone who has yet to learn that the earth revolves around the sun.

breda said :

Still waiting on the response to the flicker effect. Saying things like “it was a pretty poor disco” and “oh, well, who knows how many days of the year it happens” doesn’t cut it. I wonder if those posters would be happy to have that effect foisted on their living areas in the name of Saving the Planet?

And, while calling people who disagree with you crazy or hysterical has a long history, it is not a distinguished one.

The fact is, low frequency noise, like all external stimuli, affects different people differently. Some people sleep dreamlessly through loud music with lots of bass, others find it intolerable. It doesn’t have any moral connotation, nor does it reflect the mental health of those involved.

Refusing to accept that wind turbines can affect the quality of life of people who live close to them on the grounds that they are crazy or neurotic just demonstrates a determination to value ideology over people.

And you still haven’t backed up your statements with any hard evidence and studies backing up your claims that windfarms ‘do’ affect people to a great degree.

Ps it still is a crap ‘disco’ despite your assertions otherwise. In that video it would affect that guys house cumulatively for a few hours per year on winter mornings. Solution, close your blinds for those few hours.

breda said :

Mind if I set up a strobe light outside your living room? I’ll just do it intermittently, unpredictably, because that makes it OK.

If only someone would invent something to help block light coming in through a window… Something that functions like a curtain or perhaps some venetian blinds or maybe even combining the two!

One can only dream of such technological advances. For now though we’ll have to suffer with a sun that stays in the same position for 12 hours shining light directly through our living rooms.

breda said :

Still waiting on the response to the flicker effect. Saying things like “it was a pretty poor disco” and “oh, well, who knows how many days of the year it happens” doesn’t cut it. I wonder if those posters would be happy to have that effect foisted on their living areas in the name of Saving the Planet?

Save the Planet or no flicker effect. Hmm… I think I’ll Save the Planet. Thanks for asking. I presume the flicker effect is absent at night, so I’ll get some respite from it anyway.

I once lived in a flat in London that backed onto a 24 hour rail line. Eventually I could kinda sleep through the trains. One morning I woke early and couldn’t work out why. I went back to sleep. Woke later, turned on radio and heard that the trains had stopped running that night due to an incident way down the line. It’s amazing what you can get used to. “How often does the train go by? So often you won’t even notice it.” [The Blues Brothers]

IP

Robertson said :

The social and psychological factors referred to are twofold:
1/ deliberate, paid activism by competing industrial interests
2/ crank activism by the same kinds of people who campaign against vaccination, fluoridation, aircraft contrails, mobile phone towers, etc…

can I add to your second paragraph “using car headlights in daylight” please?

IP

Robertson – I see that you’ve been called in to help.

You might start by looking at the video I posted on page 1 – sorry to remind you that before being parachuted into a debate from outside, you need to do your homework. You just parrotted something from a factsheet without bothering to find out what the question is.

You then go on to repeat the meme that anyone who disagrees with you is either deranged or in the pay of Big somethingorother.

Here’s the thing. People like the guy in the video and others who have been living happily in the country are saying that windfactories are making their lives worse.

Your response is to claim that they are nutters or being paid by some sinister organisation. Because shut up.

Mind if I set up a strobe light outside your living room? I’ll just do it intermittently, unpredictably, because that makes it OK.

breda said :

Still waiting on the response to the flicker effect.

For starters, the “flicker effect” is a power distribution issue.

If you are referring to “shadow flicker” – that is something that does not cause health problems and can easily be mitigated by closing your curtains for the 30-odd minutes per day during the few weeks of the year that is occurs.

breda said :

Still waiting on the response to the flicker effect. Saying things like “it was a pretty poor disco” and “oh, well, who knows how many days of the year it happens” doesn’t cut it. I wonder if those posters would be happy to have that effect foisted on their living areas in the name of Saving the Planet?

And, while calling people who disagree with you crazy or hysterical has a long history, it is not a distinguished one.

The fact is, low frequency noise, like all external stimuli, affects different people differently. Some people sleep dreamlessly through loud music with lots of bass, others find it intolerable. It doesn’t have any moral connotation, nor does it reflect the mental health of those involved.

Refusing to accept that wind turbines can affect the quality of life of people who live close to them on the grounds that they are crazy or neurotic just demonstrates a determination to value ideology over people.

We know what you are saying is hysterical nonsense for the reasons explained by Simon Chapman in his program.

If you build a road, you won’t be asked to do anything about its noise unless it approaches 70dB. A wind tower is limited to causing 40dB in your backyard, but only very very rarely in Australia will anybody be living this close anyway.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Greenpark_wind_turbine_arp.jpg/220px-Greenpark_wind_turbine_arp.jpg

I would rather have a wind turbine on my front lawn that have to live on some of the busy roads I have lived on over the years.

As the British Acoustics Bulletin says, “annoyance has far more to do with social and psychological factors in those complaining than any direct effect from sound or inaudible infrasound emanating from wind turbines”.
And annoyance is not disease.

The social and psychological factors referred to are twofold:
1/ deliberate, paid activism by competing industrial interests
2/ crank activism by the same kinds of people who campaign against vaccination, fluoridation, aircraft contrails, mobile phone towers, etc…

Still waiting on the response to the flicker effect. Saying things like “it was a pretty poor disco” and “oh, well, who knows how many days of the year it happens” doesn’t cut it. I wonder if those posters would be happy to have that effect foisted on their living areas in the name of Saving the Planet?

And, while calling people who disagree with you crazy or hysterical has a long history, it is not a distinguished one.

The fact is, low frequency noise, like all external stimuli, affects different people differently. Some people sleep dreamlessly through loud music with lots of bass, others find it intolerable. It doesn’t have any moral connotation, nor does it reflect the mental health of those involved.

Refusing to accept that wind turbines can affect the quality of life of people who live close to them on the grounds that they are crazy or neurotic just demonstrates a determination to value ideology over people.

At first glance at the headline, I pictured a family with a Ralph Wiggum like child who has “Wind turbine syndrome” spinning around in circles with his arms stretched out and flinging drool whilst making farty noises in the back yard.

I am sure they did an impact statement about the effect on the superb parrot, I think before they built the Lake George wind farm? But I cannot find the actual document. I do remember clearly that, after an independent study by some experts, the conclusion was that possibly one parrot a year might get killed by the turbines. You know, that really thick one that fell out of the nest when he was a chick…

Grrrr said :

Where can I buy bird rakes or snowblowers in Canberra?

Haven’t you seen them? They’re everywhere, Aldi often have them in their catalogues and I think Bunnings have them too. I think the wind farms buy theirs wholesale though.

“Where is your evidence that people 100km from wind turbines have complained about the noise?”

Check the Canberra Times letter page for George Papadopoulos who gives his address as Yass, but actually seems to live in the country, but nowhere near any wind turbines.

IP

“NIMBY’s, nutbags and fools are the only ones against wind turbines.

Oh also, Alan jones and his listeners seem to hate wind turbines aswell.”

Why are you repeating yourself repeating yourself? These two groups are the same people…

IP

thebrownstreak6912:50 pm 19 Sep 13

I don’t have a firm opinion about wind turbines, but that first picture with the low lying cloud is fantastic. Is there a larger version?

p1 said :

I like wind turbines. I think they look nice. I just wish they had bright coloured lights on the tips of the blade so when driving past Lake George on a windy night you could see little coloured circles in the distance.

LEDs on the blade tips would look cool!

Gungahlin Al11:51 am 19 Sep 13

*hear

Gungahlin Al11:51 am 19 Sep 13

Russ said :

While I imagine you could get used to the sight and noise of turbines if you’re being paid $8k a year for each, but I would have thought the shattered, feathered corpses scattered over the ground beneath each turbine would make a hell of a stench.

I have stood underneath some of the Lake George turbines. Not a bird carcass in sight.

Nor frankly was there a hell of a lot of noise, despite a full-on wind that day. I wouldn’t want to live right under one but that’s not were they build them.

I also stopped at a location about one kilometre downwind from them and couldn’t here anything.

I’m glad someone else linked the recent Radio National story, saves me doing it.

The problem with the ‘money talks’ approach is that currently only the landholders with turbines actually on them are listening.

I’ve been thinking that wind farm proponents need to negate this bunkum by involving entire effected communities in the profit. It’s a simple task for GIS software these days to produce both viewshed and noiseshed maps. When proposing a new wind farm, it would be straightforward to develop a sliding scale of financial sharing based on degree every household within, say, 5 kilometres has its view and/or ambient noise levels altered by the proposal.

When everyone affected is also a participant in the profits, I’d wager the DA process would be smooth sailing…

I like wind turbines. I think they look nice. I just wish they had bright coloured lights on the tips of the blade so when driving past Lake George on a windy night you could see little coloured circles in the distance.

Also, I can’t believe no one has mentioned the way wind turbines turn bats inside-out?

Affirmative Action Man said :

Didn’t we go through this crap in the 80’s. It was called RSI. First it didn’t exist. Then a few wacky Doctors diagnosed it. Then there was an epidemic & thousands of people suddenly realised they had RSI. Eventually it was discredited & now nobody has it.

Not really – RSI posited a plausible mechanism, and nobody claimed RSI was stopping their chickens from laying, banishing all the earthworms in an 18km radius, causing hundreds of goats and sheep to explode, etc etc etc….

These various wind-related syndromes are completely hysterical and seem to occur only after fossil-fuel-funded anti-windfarm activists have visited a region to find and wind up all the local suggestible nutters.

Affirmative Action Man said :

Didn’t we go through this crap in the 80’s. It was called RSI. First it didn’t exist. Then a few wacky Doctors diagnosed it. Then there was an epidemic & thousands of people suddenly realised they had RSI. Eventually it was discredited & now nobody has it.

That’s a joke, right?

We’re just better at preventing RSI through better office OH&S.

EvanJames said :

c_c™ said :

Crackpot.

That’s a powerful argument, …

It’s not an argument, it’s an assessment. A pretty fair assessment at that.

Affirmative Action Man8:41 am 19 Sep 13

Didn’t we go through this crap in the 80’s. It was called RSI. First it didn’t exist. Then a few wacky Doctors diagnosed it. Then there was an epidemic & thousands of people suddenly realised they had RSI. Eventually it was discredited & now nobody has it.

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Task3: Use your brain.

CraigT wins.

FATALITY

Again, nuts and fruit.

c_c™ said :

Crackpot.

That’s a powerful argument, but not quite as convincing as yours and others where you spray a few insults. People who use insults for argument always convince everyone.

(Should I put in a /sarc tag? The way so many of you are being horribly trolled by another poster suggests it might be necessary).

Can’t we just build the wind farm near Tralee, they don’t seem to care about potential noise and the turbines will drown out the noise of aircraft too.

Joking aside, yes there may be negatives with wind turbines, but there are negatives with everything in life. Wind turbines negatives are in general pretty small.

Woody Mann-Caruso8:17 pm 18 Sep 13

Task3: Use your brain.

CraigT wins.

FATALITY

Grrrr said :

Where can I buy bird rakes or snowblowers in Canberra? I want to take them out the back of Lake George and tidy up the ground there so no-one sees the dead birds.

I understand Toro are one of the main suppliers of snowblowers in Australia – as you might guess, the market for them here isn’t very large, being only ski areas and wind farms.

I’d suggest calling Capital Wind Farm and asking where they get their bird rakes and other bird-clearing gear from.

breda said :

If you want to know what living near a windturbine is like, take a look at this short video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrNYwpIqDsU

This guy moved to a country cottage wanting a peaceful rural lifestyle. When approached about having windmills near his house, he said sure, being a typical rural greenie.

Check out the video to see what the result was, and how he feels about it now.

It’s like living in a disco in sunny weather, and the noise is quite audible.

40decibels and he reckons he hears it indoors over his tv? Lol the birds in the video are louder.

And honestly, you must go to some pretty shit discos if that’s your belief. And Interestingly he doesn’t say for how many days a year and for how long this ‘disco’ lasts for. The sun doesn’t stay still you know?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd6:58 pm 18 Sep 13

NIMBY’s, nutbags and fools are the only ones against wind turbines.

Oh also, Alan jones and his listeners seem to hate wind turbines aswell.

breda said :

Keep it up, c-c, that’s just the kind of arrogance that lost political, rather than genuine, environmentalists so many votes in the last ACT and recent Federal elections.

Unless of course you forgot the /sarc tag.

Making up more grand statements without any basis. What a joke.

johnboy said :

No one with a turbine on their land seems to mind.

It’s the mysterious property of missing out on the money that seems to bring on the attacks of the vapours.

Exactly. I’d put in the same category as those who feign EMF sensitivity.

Craig, so are you saying that the noise on the video I posted was fake?

Where is your evidence that people 100km from wind turbines have complained about the noise?

Still waiting for you and your pals to look up the answer on the flicker effect. Seems to be taking a while. Perhaps the pro-Big Wind sites need updating.

There is no need for me to respond to your stupid reiteration of the assertion that doof-doof is just fine as long as the decibel level is below legal limits. Good luck with that argument.

EvanJames said :

The low-frequency noise issue still worries me. it’s not “loud”, but if you’ve lived in an apartment building with low bass rumble from someone’s stereo, you’ll know the effect it has.

Yes, especially if you’re like the anti-windfarm nutter who can hear the doof-doof music from 100km away.

EvanJames said :

Quite a few normal folk who had the capital wind farm at Bungendore move in next door were very upset about the noise it made.

Define “normal”. Define “next door”. Define “upset”. Define “noise it made”.

I am predicting the definitions you provide will reveal that sentence to have been entirely spurious.

EvanJames said :

And if wind farms are so harmless, when are they going to start building them nearer to the users of the power: towns and cities?

Task1: consider this question – you’re deciding to invest your money into something in order for it to return a profit. Wind farms return a profit based on the amount of wind they can farm. Where, therefore, would you want to put a wind farm?
Task2: look at this map:
http://www.energy.nsw.gov.au/sustainable/renewable/wind/sustain_renew_wind_atlas_poster.pdf
Task3: Use your brain.

breda said :

Those who claim that low frequency noise is not a problem because of the decibel level are missing the point. Firstly, it is not the decibels, but the frequency – as anyone who has been kept awake by doof-doof music which is not very loud can attest.

If it’s “not very loud”, how is it keeping you awake? Funny how the people who actually live with these on their land sleep just fine, don’t you think?

breda said :

Secondly, it is intermittent – so you can’t just tune it out as easily as people who live near expressways do.

Well, if that’s going to be the quality of your argument, do you really wonder that people are pointing at you saying, “look at that nutter!”?
A motorway typically produces 70-75 decibels in nearby houses and shops. No wind farm produces anything even remotely resembling this noise level.
As for aircraft noise, they don’t even bother measuring any noise below 70dB that vast swathes of Sydney has to live with.
Wind farms produce virtually no noise compared with the noise 95% live with as part of our everyday life. That is why they have to invent nonsense to well documented by Simon Chapman.

Keep it up, c-c, that’s just the kind of arrogance that lost political, rather than genuine, environmentalists so many votes in the last ACT and recent Federal elections.

Unless of course you forgot the /sarc tag.

breda said :

Those who claim that low frequency noise is not a problem because of the decibel level are missing the point. Firstly, it is not the decibels, but the frequency – as anyone who has been kept awake by doof-doof music which is not very loud can attest. Secondly, it is intermittent – so you can’t just tune it out as easily as people who live near expressways do. And I note that people who live near expressways have often managed to convince governments to build noise barriers. As for the suggestion that just because some people live near airports, it is OK to impose sound pollution on people who happen to live near a proposed windfactory – give me a break.

I notice that no-one has explained away the awful flicker factor that the people in my clip posted above experience. Having to keep your curtains or blinds closed on a sunny day because otherwise your living room becomes a disco is not trivial.

And for what? So that intermittent power at multiples of the cost of conventional power can be produced so that people can feel good about themselves, at the expense of consumers and taxpayers. So that the most visible natural landmarks can be blighted with industrial structures, which shred birds and bats.

So-called “environmentalists” have completely lost the plot. No wonder their vote fell by a third in the election.

Crackpot.

They’re still beating that old “wind turbine syndrome” drum? That was debunked years ago.

It can be cured by iridologists and homeopaths.

I watched Breda’s video and can understand why that pulsing noise (even if not so loud decibel-wise) would be very aggravating and almost impossible to tune out.

I am sure some are willing to put up with such things for the money, but it seems that neighbours who had no say in it are often affected. Loss of control over their once-peaceful domain would be a big thing.

laraeddy said :

Oh, and really suggest you reconsider “Big Wind” as a term of derision – it’s gonna backfire one day.

Champagne comedy!

Russ said :

Just means they’ve had people out with bird rakes and snowblowers to “clean up” the shot.

Where can I buy bird rakes or snowblowers in Canberra? I want to take them out the back of Lake George and tidy up the ground there so no-one sees the dead birds.

Out of interest, how many dead birds a day/week/month should a turbine farm the size of the one at Lake George cause? I need to know how many to expect, you see. I’ll be very disappointed if I’m standing around out there all day and not a single bird is killed.

Those who claim that low frequency noise is not a problem because of the decibel level are missing the point. Firstly, it is not the decibels, but the frequency – as anyone who has been kept awake by doof-doof music which is not very loud can attest. Secondly, it is intermittent – so you can’t just tune it out as easily as people who live near expressways do. And I note that people who live near expressways have often managed to convince governments to build noise barriers. As for the suggestion that just because some people live near airports, it is OK to impose sound pollution on people who happen to live near a proposed windfactory – give me a break.

I notice that no-one has explained away the awful flicker factor that the people in my clip posted above experience. Having to keep your curtains or blinds closed on a sunny day because otherwise your living room becomes a disco is not trivial.

And for what? So that intermittent power at multiples of the cost of conventional power can be produced so that people can feel good about themselves, at the expense of consumers and taxpayers. So that the most visible natural landmarks can be blighted with industrial structures, which shred birds and bats.

So-called “environmentalists” have completely lost the plot. No wonder their vote fell by a third in the election.

Here_and_Now said :

Russ said :

Every shot has the camera subtly tilted up for “some reason”. Even the feature pic in this post has used fog to obscure the feathered carnage.

Far from ‘all’. I just spent about a minute on Google Images and turned several up. If it’s a conspiracy, it needs work.

Just means they’ve had people out with bird rakes and snowblowers to “clean up” the shot.

OLydia said :

breda said :

If you want to know what living near a windturbine is like, take a look at this short video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrNYwpIqDsU

This guy moved to a country cottage wanting a peaceful rural lifestyle. When approached about having windmills near his house, he said sure, being a typical rural greenie.

Check out the video to see what the result was, and how he feels about it now.

It’s like living in a disco in sunny weather, and the noise is quite audible.

Just watched video. The turbine noise was measured at about 40db. This is equivalent to the noise of a running stream or a humming refridgerator. Normal conservation is between 50-65db. In video, birdsong was louder than the turbines. How about a bit of perspective?

BTW I have stood underneath a fast turning wind turbine, and yes, the wind noise did drown out any turbine noise. When the turbine was turning slowly, there was no noise at all. These turbines are situated very close to the township at Cape Jervis on the Flerieu Peninsula in South Australia, with nearest houses about 1-2km from turbines

South Australians seem to have no worries with extra noise. Have a squiz at the Adelaide airport where there are houses built right up to the perimeter fence.

EvanJames said :

The low-frequency noise issue still worries me. it’s not “loud”, but if you’ve lived in an apartment building with low bass rumble from someone’s stereo, you’ll know the effect it has.

Funny then that there is more infrasound around coastal areas, yet it is not a problem even though population densities are higher. People even go there for a holiday and generally return home relaxed and refreshed.

EvanJames said :

Quite a few normal folk who had the capital wind farm at Bungendore move in next door were very upset about the noise it made. made upset noises about it

There, I fixed that for you.

For an interesting insight into the minds of anti-wind nutters, check out this list of problems attributed to wind farms. My favourites:

My wife and I have aged over five years in the past two years.
having to take 15 Valium tablets a day
[Someone may] get a cancer in the lung or bowel. Few doctors today would make the connection with the wind farm.
cold sores
dairy cows shocked through milking machines
loud angry arguments
increase local night time temperatures by fanning warmer air onto the ground
lack of sex drive
My peahen refused to remain with the peacock
staring blankly

It’s no secret that people put up with a change in their habitual conditions as a result of a nearby power plant where the locals derive some economical benefit (be it direct or indirect). That’s happened since power plants were first built.

It’s also important to point out that no power plant is environmentally benign, nor without some effect on local inhabitants. Power plants like that simply don’t exist (yet).

What intrigues me is how polarised this debate has become. On the one side we have nutters wanting to believe every bad story about wind turbines (with some outrageous health claims), and on the other we have fruit-loops refusing to believe that wind turbines could have any health/aesthetic/comfort effects at all.

Reality, once again, can be found somewhere between the nutloaf and fruitcake aisles.

Woody Mann-Caruso2:39 pm 18 Sep 13

thought the shattered, feathered corpses scattered over the ground beneath each turbine would make a hell of a stench.

It’s OK – I let my cat out at night to clean them up.

He gets sick of bilby after a while.

johnboy said :

No one with a turbine on their land seems to mind.

It’s the mysterious property of missing out on the money that seems to bring on the attacks of the vapours.

Some reports I’ve seen about low frequency or infrasound have suggested in addition to perception being physically subjective, there is also a psychological component to the perception of such sound, which may be related to attitude.

johnboy said :

No one with a turbine on their land seems to mind.

It’s the mysterious property of missing out on the money that seems to bring on the attacks of the vapours.

Exactly. If only we could replace the echidnas with feral cats, even better if we could substitute them for the feathered carnage.

breda said :

If you want to know what living near a windturbine is like, take a look at this short video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrNYwpIqDsU

This guy moved to a country cottage wanting a peaceful rural lifestyle. When approached about having windmills near his house, he said sure, being a typical rural greenie.

Check out the video to see what the result was, and how he feels about it now.

It’s like living in a disco in sunny weather, and the noise is quite audible.

Just watched video. The turbine noise was measured at about 40db. This is equivalent to the noise of a running stream or a humming refridgerator. Normal conservation is between 50-65db. In video, birdsong was louder than the turbines. How about a bit of perspective?

BTW I have stood underneath a fast turning wind turbine, and yes, the wind noise did drown out any turbine noise. When the turbine was turning slowly, there was no noise at all. These turbines are situated very close to the township at Cape Jervis on the Flerieu Peninsula in South Australia, with nearest houses about 1-2km from turbines

Has it occurred to anyone else that if the farmers don’t like the noise or other associated going-ons then they can just say ‘no’ when they’re approached by the wind companies?
Nobody is forcing them to build one, but the $$ seem to haze their brain function to weigh up the pros and cons.
Frankly if you didn’t do your research before signing the contract then you have no right to complain afterwards.

No one with a turbine on their land seems to mind.

It’s the mysterious property of missing out on the money that seems to bring on the attacks of the vapours.

Russ said :

You can go and quote all the so called “scientific” studies all you like (most likely commissioned and paid for by Big Wind) but answer me this: why is it that all pictures of wind turbines *never* show the ground directly beneath the turbine? Every shot has the camera subtly tilted up for “some reason”. Even the feature pic in this post has used fog to obscure the feathered carnage.

Ummm, windmills are really tall. People with cameras are kinda tall, but not THAT tall. Pictures of the bit of a windmill at head height would be really boring.

On the subject of biased studies, you might like to explain why a non-practicing doctor operating out of the office of a mining investment company (http://www.skeptics.com.au/features/bent-spoon/nominations/ and read “Sarah Laurie and the Waubra Foundation”) has more credibility than a Professor of Public Health with a swathe of peer-reviewed research behind him. – reckon I know who I believe more.

Oh, and really suggest you reconsider “Big Wind” as a term of derision – it’s gonna backfire one day.

Here_and_Now1:55 pm 18 Sep 13

Russ said :

You can go and quote all the so called “scientific” studies all you like (most likely commissioned and paid for by Big Wind) but answer me this: why is it that all pictures of wind turbines *never* show the ground directly beneath the turbine? Every shot has the camera subtly tilted up for “some reason”. Even the feature pic in this post has used fog to obscure the feathered carnage.

Far from ‘all’. I just spent about a minute on Google Images and turned several up. If it’s a conspiracy, it needs work.

I’m going to take a guess that the angle is tilted up because the photographer is standing on the ground and the turbine is very tall.

EvanJames said :

The low-frequency noise issue still worries me. it’s not “loud”, but if you’ve lived in an apartment building with low bass rumble from someone’s stereo, you’ll know the effect it has.

Quite a few normal folk who had the capital wind farm at Bungendore move in next door were very upset about the noise it made.

And if wind farms are so harmless, when are they going to start building them nearer to the users of the power: towns and cities?

Ah yes, the ‘low-frequency noise’ that the syndrome brigade often speaks of.

A 10 turbine wind farm will have a sound pressure of 35-45db at 350m away. Rural background noise pressure levels are 20-40db.

(Macintosh & Downie, 2006)

Russ said :

You can go and quote all the so called “scientific” studies all you like (most likely commissioned and paid for by Big Wind) but answer me this: why is it that all pictures of wind turbines *never* show the ground directly beneath the turbine? Every shot has the camera subtly tilted up for “some reason”. Even the feature pic in this post has used fog to obscure the feathered carnage.

hahahaha HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, because in this picture, if the fog wasnt there, you would be able to see what was sitting under the windmills. Mate, i put my money that if an elephant was riding a tricycle beneath the windmill holding a 20 foot neon sign saying “there are dead birds here”, you still wouldnt be able to see it.

EvanJames said :

The low-frequency noise issue still worries me. it’s not “loud”, but if you’ve lived in an apartment building with low bass rumble from someone’s stereo, you’ll know the effect it has.

Quite a few normal folk who had the capital wind farm at Bungendore move in next door were very upset about the noise it made.

E James raises a good point. When are we going to get them in the ACT ?. Why should we let NSW grab all the glory; and the enhancement to their landscape like whats happening to Lake George .
Whats wrong with a great row of them right along the Brinddys , and then one real big fker on top of Mt Franklin so we could see it in town.

And if wind farms are so harmless, when are they going to start building them nearer to the users of the power: towns and cities?

pink little birdie1:37 pm 18 Sep 13

EvanJames said :

And if wind farms are so harmless, when are they going to start building them nearer to the users of the power: towns and cities?

umm never… but that is mostly because the wind near towns and cities isn’t of a high enough constant speed to generate electricty.

Stand in a street, stand on a surban oval, stand on an urban mountain, stand in a paddock, and stand in a mountain surrounded by a valley. each one for about an hour when the weather is the same. Describe the wind on each them…

The low-frequency noise issue still worries me. it’s not “loud”, but if you’ve lived in an apartment building with low bass rumble from someone’s stereo, you’ll know the effect it has.

Quite a few normal folk who had the capital wind farm at Bungendore move in next door were very upset about the noise it made.

And if wind farms are so harmless, when are they going to start building them nearer to the users of the power: towns and cities?

Hysteria. Tell them to stay off the barbituates.

You can go and quote all the so called “scientific” studies all you like (most likely commissioned and paid for by Big Wind) but answer me this: why is it that all pictures of wind turbines *never* show the ground directly beneath the turbine? Every shot has the camera subtly tilted up for “some reason”. Even the feature pic in this post has used fog to obscure the feathered carnage.

If you want to know what living near a windturbine is like, take a look at this short video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrNYwpIqDsU

This guy moved to a country cottage wanting a peaceful rural lifestyle. When approached about having windmills near his house, he said sure, being a typical rural greenie.

Check out the video to see what the result was, and how he feels about it now.

It’s like living in a disco in sunny weather, and the noise is quite audible.

I wonder how many people who suffer wind turbine syndrome also dislike the constant noise of waves crashing on the beach?

As for bird kills, reading this article might help you understand where the numbers are drawn from: http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm

Executive summary: anti-turbine campaigners take the worst kill rate in the world and extrapolate to all wind farms.

Russ said :

While I imagine you could get used to the sight and noise of turbines if you’re being paid $8k a year for each, but I would have thought the shattered, feathered corpses scattered over the ground beneath each turbine would make a hell of a stench.

There are lots of studies that show that wind turbines kill far fewer birds than fossil fuel plants. Per gigawatt hour of electricity produced, fossil fuel plants kill 20 times the number of birds.

Below is birds killed in US data per year:
By wind turbines: 20,000 to 500,000
By fossil fuel power plants: 14,000,000
By cars/trucks: 50-100,000,000
By feral cats: up to 3 billion!!!

Wind turbines are a negligible cause of deaths of birds, even when adjusted for deaths per unit of power produced.

To put it another way, building wind turbines and reducing/replacing fossil fuel power plants actually SAVES birds lives.

Source: wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_wind_power#Birds

Russ said :

I would have thought the shattered, feathered corpses scattered over the ground beneath each turbine would make a hell of a stench.

Fresh meat – extra bonus!

While I imagine you could get used to the sight and noise of turbines if you’re being paid $8k a year for each, but I would have thought the shattered, feathered corpses scattered over the ground beneath each turbine would make a hell of a stench.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.