Noise:

Dr Nina Pierpoint, Author of Wind Turbine Syndrome, visit her site WindTurbineSyndrome.com get an extract of her book click here Sample Pages and here for the Executive Summary, also check out all the peer reviews.

A paper by Dr Chris Hanning, Consultant, Sleep Disorders Clinic, Leicester General Hospital entitled “Sleep Disturbance and Wind Turbine Noise” click here to download.

Dr A Harry, on Wind Turbines: Noise and Health, click here.

If you are heavily into the science of acoustics, you might want to read the definitive NASA report from  Hubbard and Sheppard 13th Feb 2009, (2oMb) click here to download.

And here’s what our own NHS has to say on the subject, click here

House Prices:

Details of the house price reduction after a court ruling, and council tax reduction click here to see the article.

Details of the High Court case for noise nuisance against the wind farm operator backed by their house insurer, click here to see the article.

Forever? It’s a matter of interpretation.

A recent windfarm planning application was turned down on appeal by the Inspector on the grounds “I have also borne in mind the fact that planning permission is sought for a period of 25 years. However, as such a time period is roughly a third of an average lifetime I have some difficulty in regarding it a “temporary” in any real sense.” – So what is the opposite of temporary? Permanent? Forever? Click here to download the document from the government’s website.

And for more evidence look at the Wind Industry’s own body, the BWEA, which is funded by and represents the interests of the Wind Power developers, and operates a large, well financed PR and lobbying campaign to ensures its views are represented in all government bodies and quangos, take a look at its database of exiting sites and planned developments – just note the number of  second phases, repowering  and extensions. Click Here for the Current Installations , click here for those with Planning Permission Consented  and here for those Under Construction and here for those in Planning.

In summary that is 2759 turbines in current operation with a theoretical maximum capacity of 4,115 MW and another 6,963 turbines with a theoretical maximum capacity of 18,839 MW consented, under construction or in planning.  That’s the equivalent of lining every single motorway covering the whole country with a turbine at every 350 meters.  And based on Scottish Power’s figures you’d need to build 3 ADDITIONAL Drax powerstations to back them up for when the wind doesn’t blow!

In October 2009, Vale Villages Against Scottish Power (VVASP) issued a Newsletter with a copy of a banner we had displayed at the drop-in sessions hosted by ScottishPower Renewables (SPR). It compared the height of a 125m Wind Turbine with local buildings with several boxes on the leaflet explaining our concerns. This prompted someone to complain to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).

It is not unusual for wind farm applications to attract the attention of the ASA. Indeed, SPR were the subject of a complaint to the ASA over the size of the turbines illustrated in their leaflet last year. SPR accepted the complaint and have agreed their leaflet will not appear again. This is all the more remarkable, given the wealth of resources available to SPR, whereas we are a small volunteer group working in our own time. Nevertheless, the ASA suggested that SPR consult with them before further leaflets are distributed.

The first complaint against VVASP concerned the use of the word “forever”.

VVASP said that the turbines would “…change the landscape forever”. The complainant said the turbines only had a life of 25 years. We argued that the driving force for the generation of electricity from wind turbines is to reduce carbon emissions. If we are serious about climate change we must stop burning fossil fuels FOREVER not just for 25 years. Wind farms that we have visited are being enlarged or re-powered with larger turbines, so we believe it is naive to think that wind farms are only here for 25 years. According to the ASA this use of “forever” is misleading. We do not share this view.

VVASP believes that, by any reasonable interpretation, the term “forever” is relevant in this context and the complaint trivial.

What is not trivial is the subject of the second complaint concerning the potential for large-scale industrial turbines to have an adverse effect on the health and sleep patterns of people living closeby.

We quoted the work of the American Dr. Nina Pierpoint whom we believe has undertaken extensive research in the field and published a book on the subject. (See www.windturbinesyndrome.com). We also cited a 2009 report from Dr. Chris Hanning, one of the UK’s leading authorities in Sleep Disorders Medicine and even a recent report commissioned by the American Wind Energy Association. 

The ASA decided that none of this research was sufficiently robust to justify our claim, despite the fact that we had also quoted first hand experiences of people whose lives had been blighted by wind turbines located close to their homes. Indeed, some people have had to vacate their homes due to the noise/sleep loss caused by the wind turbines.

VVASP argued that, if experts in this field express valid concerns, these should be taken seriously and Government should adopt the precautionary principle and accept the expert’s advice to only site turbines more than 2Km from homes.

If Wychavon District Council approves SPR’s plans we believe we shall have the largest turbines built closer to homes than anywhere else in the UK.

Despite this, the ASA dismissed all the experts’ views and first hand evidence and upheld the complaint concluding our claim was misleading. Again, we strongly contest the ASA’s decision. We also believe we had taken all reasonable steps to ensure our leaflet was based on well-founded research from recognised experts and, further supported this with first hand evidence. 

Finally we quoted a 2007 report commissioned by the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors concerning house price devaluation. The ASA concluded that the verbatim quote used was not representative of the report as a whole. We believe that by any measure of perceived wisdom, given two very similar properties, one in open countryside and the other with a turbine the height of a forty-storey building nearby, the latter would have a lower value.

The ASA disagreed and said it was misleading.

VVASP has agreed to modify the wording on the banner to comply with the ASA ruling

As an organisation, VVASP take great care to ensure all our work is of the highest standard, especially when it involves communicating with the public.

VVASP is extremely disappointed with the ASA’s ruling and strongly disagrees with its decisions, believing we took all reasonable precautions to justify our claims. We will continue to fight the proposed Lenchwick Windfarm and keep residents informed of any relevant information.

Disclaimer

Whilst we have taken every care to ensure the above accurately reflects the ASA’s decision, the opinions expressed are those of VVASP and we cannot accept any responsibility for any errors, misunderstandings or omissions.

Contact VVASP info@VVASP.org.uk

Despite statements by SPR at the SPR organised September sessions that it would be submitted in November, that then slipped to December and then to January, the latest information that we have received is that a Planning Application will be submitted late February.

They have recently been adding in some additional viewpoints for photomontages – including a view from The Lenches Club.

It is also likely to include an application for two alternative access points, one via Badgers Hill and the other via Harvington, Leys Road, The Hand and then across the fields from their.

We apologise that we are unable to give you any more information that this at present, unfortunately that is all that we know, – so much for ‘public consultation’ by SPR!

As soon as we know any more details, we will let you know.

10am

meet at The Lenches Club

CHOICE OF TWO LENGTHS OF WALKS

COME AND SUPPORT VVASP

THE WINDFARM PLANNING APPLICATION IS EXPECTED TO BE IN THE NEW YEAR

DROP IN SESSIONS WILL BE ARRANGED AS SOON AS WE HAVE A FIRM DATE

original article here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/planning/6803823/Wind-turbine-noise-warnings-were-dismissed-by-civil-servants.html

Consultants recommended lowering night-time noise limits because the sounds made by spinning blades were enough to disrupt sleep patterns.

However, the advice, contained in a draft version of their 2006 report, was removed from the final submission which was eventually used in official guidance for local authorities ruling on planning applications from wind farm developers.

It means that hundreds of turbines at wind farms in Britain built since 2006 have been allowed to continue generating high levels of noise.

Evidence of the changed advice was uncovered after a two-year battle using the Freedom of Information Act by campaigners opposed to a wind turbine development close to their home at in mid-Devon.

One of those campaigners, Mike Hulme, said: “This proves what we have been saying all along, that the noise guidelines should be reviewed. They haven’t changed substantially since 1997, in which time the design of turbines has changed and the number of wind farms has increased.

“Turbines used to be about 50 feet and now they are closer to 400 feet.

"Residents are afraid to complain to their council because the problem is then in the public domain and it becomes impossible to sell their house."

The noise warnings were made in a draft report by Hayes McKenzie Partnership (HMP).

It was commissioned by the Department for Trade and Industry, since replaced by the Department for Energy and Climate Change, following a 2004 article in The Daily Telegraph that identified wind turbines at a Cornish wind farm as giving rise to health problems associated with low frequency noise emissions.

It said the sound caused by “aerodynamic modulation” – the rhythmic ‘whump whump’ of the blades – was enough to disturb the sleep of nearby residents, creating an "adverse" impact on their health, and recommended the night noise limited be cut from 43 decibels to 38.

However, an anonymous government official then inserted remarks querying the impact of the proposed change. “What will the impact of this be?,” the civil servant wrote. “Are we saying that this is the situation for all wind farms … I think we need a sense of the scale of this and the impact.”

The final report removed any suggestion of cutting the noise limits or adding any further penalty if turbines generated a beating noise — and recommended local authorities to stick to the 1996 guidelines.

Britain has 253 land-based wind farms generating 3.5 gigawatts, but this is expected to double or even triple by 2020 to help to meet targets for cutting CO2 emissions.

A spokesman for the DECC denied officials had put pressure on the consultants to remove the noise warnings.

He added: "Noise impacts are an aspect which is considered within the planning process before any decision is taken whether or not to grant consent to a project."

Thanks to The Daily Telegraph for this report

Environmental Protection UK has called on the government urgently to update its advice on how local authorities gauge the effect of noise from wind turbines.

Peter Luff has long been calling for a toughening up of the current guidelines governing how close wind turbines can be built to people’s homes.  In the last session of parliament he introduced legislation on the issue.

Peter said,

“As my Ten Minute Rule Bill – the Wind Turbines (Proximity of Habitation) Bill -demonstrated there is a problem because the current regulations just don’t deal with the huge wind turbines now being proposed.

“My concerns, prompted by the proposed wind farm between Church Lench and Bishampton, were primarily about visual issues. Having these monsters virtually in your back garden just isn’t acceptable.

“But now we have new expert evidence that noise is indeed a big issue too, just as local campaigners have been saying. As it stands, the system just isn’t adequately protecting residents.”   

“I am writing to the planning minister urging him to adopt my bill as government policy and I hope to raise it in the Commons today.  Environmental Protection UK has reinforced what we all know as common sense: these huge new wind turbines, up to 125m tall, are too big to be as close to people’s homes as the existing policy allows.”

Wind turbine noise rules ‘dated’

The government urgently needs to update its guidance on how local authorities should assess the impact of noise from wind turbines.

Environmental Protection UK say turbines are now so large, the noise generated by the turning blades can affect those living nearby.

The pressure group believes that changes in technology are not being reflected in the current guidelines.

The government says it is continuing research into the impact of noise.

Radical overhaul

Experts working for the group say the government guidelines on acceptable noise levels for wind turbines were due for revision 11 years ago and there has been little sign that changes in wind turbine technology is reflected in these rules.

They add that this guidance was designed for structures of about 90ft (27m) in height, but some applications for wind farms include turbines that are at least three times higher.

The group says that current guidance assumes that background noise at ground level, such as the rustling of leaves, would help mask the noise of the blades turning.

Turbines are becoming so big, the group says, that any masking effect on the ground could be cancelled out.

Environmental Protection UK argue the rules need a radical overhaul, otherwise applications for new wind farms are in danger of being rejected.

See original article here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8379970.stm

Footnote:
Environmental Protection UK is the environmental protection charity supported by pollution control professionals. We have been working for a cleaner, quieter, healthier world since 1898.

Environmental Protection UK campaigns to minimise noise pollution – as well as reducing air pollution and emissions of greenhouse gases.

It is supported by the UK government, Environment Agency and Scottish Environment Protection Agency

A piece of legislation to control the distance between wind farms and the nearest house is to be introduced into the Commons next month

Legislation backs VVASP campaign for a 2Km No Zone

Mid Worcestershire MP Peter Luff, who has been working with residents on the proposed Lenches/Bishampton wind farm in his constituency, will introduce the “Onshore Wind Turbines (Proximity of Habitation) Bill” on November 3rd.

Using the so-called 10 minute rule procedure, Peter will speak for up to ten minutes, making the case for his bill to proceed to the next stage.

Peter explained,

“It is my limited intention to raise the aesthetic and environmental concerns associated with large wind turbines when they are located too close to homes.
“I happen to be a keen exponent of alternative and renewable energy sources, but feel strongly that onshore wind farms are only appropriate where their visual and environmental impact on open countryside is acceptable.

“Government policy on this issue is vague, giving little protection to local communities who have legitimate objections to the building of these turbines in their area. The companies appear to comply with a voluntary 500m “buffer zone” but this has no legal force.

“The onshore wind turbines proposed for the Lenches are 125m high – the equivalent of a forty storey building and half as high again as Big Ben – but will be located around 650 metres from houses. There is uproar in the affected villages!

“I had originally suggested a blanket one kilometre buffer zones, but after talking to local residents and my colleagues in the Commons, I will propose that smaller turbines should be at least 0.5 of a mile from habitation, medium sized ones a mile, and the largest turbines 1.5 miles.

“I hope that imposing these limits would lead to those applications coming forward being inherently less objectionable and therefore attracting less local opposition.

“It is a limited measure that makes no judgement about the merits of onshore wind, or on the bigger issues of climate change and targets for green energy. You can take whatever view you like on these issues and still see merit in my bill!

“It’s just intended to reduce the risks of these turbines being built unreasonably close to homes – unless, of course, the affected homes wanted them (perhaps because it is on their land and they will benefit financially).”

Tuesday 22nd September 2009

The huge wind turbines proposed for the site between Bishampton and the Lenches would be “just too close to people’s homes” says the local MP Peter Luff.

Mr Luff was speaking after visiting the public exhibition organised by Scottish Power Renewables at Norton and Lenchwick parish hall last night (Monday).
Peter explained,

“I believe there should be an absolute bar on building large commercial wind turbines closer than a kilometre to people’s homes. The visuals I saw last night at the exhibition, showing the appearance of the wind farm at closer range than that, confirmed my view.

“Some of the five turbines now proposed for the site would be only a little over 600 metres from houses and that won’t do. These are effectively 40-storey high structures in open countryside – they must be a reasonable distance from homes.

“I support the development of some onshore wind generating capacity in England – but these enormous turbines would be among the largest ever constructed at onshore sire in the UK. Indeed, I believe they were originally developed for offshore use and that is where they belong.

“The formal planning application is not yet submitted – it is due in November. I will be waiting for the formal position of all the local parish councils on that application before reaching a final conclusion myself. In view of the specific location I will be particularly concerned to listen to the views of Bishampton and Church Lench parish councils.

“However, I am increasingly unconvinced that the relatively small amount of electricity that would be generated by this scheme is worth the damage it would do.”

ScottishPower Renewables today released details of the first phase of development for the proposed Lenchwick Windfarm.

ScottishPower Renewables, which has a track record of multiple planning applications and has proposals to extend all of its existing industrial wind power generating sites, today released details of the proposed locations of the first set of wind turbines for their proposed ‘Lenchwick Windfarm’.

With the release of details for PHASE 1 of the mis-appropriately named ‘Lenchwick Windfarm’, it has decided that the imposing Bishampton Bank skyline should be dominated by 5, 125m tall wind turbines, placed in a straight line along the top of the bank.

In an area that could not be further from Lenchwick if it tried, (such that it doesn’t even appear on the map released by ScottishPower Renewables) the proposal will dominate the skyline for miles around.

ScottishPower Renewables policies and track records indicate that if they succeed with their planning application for Phase 1, then Phase 2 is only a matter of time away.

Having already erected an anemometer mast near to the Grade II listed Norton Church, and already carried out the necessary Environmental Impact Assessment for the Norton / Harvington area, their location plan below clearly indicates where Phase 2 is likely to be located.

.

Come and join the fun at 7pm on Saturday 12th September.

Tickets £5 which includes a  Buffet , or just come along and cheer your village team followed by the Grand Raffle Draw, with Amazing prizes.

Tickets for sale on the night or from your village Rep. (see Contacts)