Engineer says MOECC testing shows wind turbines out of compliance, but continue to operate

Noise measurement protocol needlessly complex, failing to identify critical issues with wind turbine noise, Ontario engineer says.

He used MOECC data to confirm “tonal” quality to wind turbine noise emissions. One project has been operating for eight years — residents continue to complain, no action by Ontario government

Conference venue in Rotterdam: Wind Turbine Noise 2017

Ontario engineer William Palmer has proposed a rigorous, but simple and transparent technique to assess wind turbine noise, that could replace the problematic complex computer models and “black box” algorithms currently used in the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change newest protocol to assess wind turbine noise compliance.

Speaking at the International Conference on Wind Turbine Noise that took place in Rotterdam beginning May 2, Palmer said of his proposed method,

The method had to consider that an effective monitoring system must take into account more than just averaging sound power levels over a long term. The method recognizes that humans are bothered by the changes and annoying characteristics that occur, as well as long term averages. Others describe this as the need to determine how the special characteristics of sound quality may impact quality of life.

To verify this approach, assessments were conducted using the method at two wind power developments in Ontario. In the K2 Wind project, he used MOECC data from testing in early March 2017 at a home within the K2 project. He was able to demonstrate that the MOECC data confirmed that the noise from the turbines surrounding the home had a tonal quality; that means it should require a 5 dB(A) penalty be applied to the other test results.

He reported:

Although the Ministry did not provide calibration files for their sound recordings they did provide in their report their assessment of the sound pressure level for each sample. Using the Electroacoustics Toolbox, and working backwards to set the given sound pressure level for a number of the recordings provided as the calibration level, permitted a “Quasi Calibration” of the Ministry data, and from that a calibrated FFT analysis was made. … Again, it was seen that when the residents described adverse effects in their comments filed with their initiation of recordings, FFT analysis of the sound recordings taken at those times clearly show a tonal condition occurring at about 450 Hz.

In the Enbridge project, where Mr. Palmer also conducted testing, he found similar tonal quality to the noise emissions in that project, and confirmed that the noise coming from the turbines is above the approved levels at several locations.

For this facility as an example, where the turbines first went into operation in November 2008, and citizen complaints occurred soon after, it has not yet been possible to complete a report to demonstrate compliance. The monitoring is still in progress, over 8 years later, with the turbines continuing in operation, and residents continuing to complain. The hypothesis is that individual samples are not representative due to variation.

Process is complex

He offered comment on the current protocol being used to assess compliance by the MOECC:

A premise of the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change wind turbine monitoring protocol is that monitoring to show compliance must be conducted over a long period. The protocol requires the initial acoustic monitoring by residents to produce at least a 10-minute sample for each complaint period, and the final compliance protocol requires a minimum of 120 one-minute measurement intervals for each integer of wind speed. During each of those one-minute intervals there must be no changes in wind speed or direction. A further 60 samples are required for each integer wind speed with the turbines not operational. So far data collection has taken years to obtain a sufficient number of samples, and in at least one array, initial reports showed that over 90% of samples taken were discarded as non-compliant. All samples are logarithmically combined to determine the Leq produced by the facility, which eliminates any short-term change effects. This appears to be precisely the sort of monitoring that was cautioned against by Genuit and Fiebig described in Section 1 when they noted, “By relying on sound pressure levels averaged over long time periods and suppressing all aspects of quality, the specific properties of environmental noise situations cannot be identified, because annoyance caused by environmental noise has a broader linkage with various acoustical properties such as frequency spectrum, duration, impulsive, tonal and low-frequency components, etc. than only with SPL [Sound Pressure Level]. In many cases these acoustical properties affect the quality of life.”

The annoyance aspects that impact the quality of life of impacted residents are not being assessed.

People walking away from loved homes

The current protocol cannot possibly identify critical issues in wind turbine noise emissions, Palmer asserts. In conclusion, he said:

This paper has demonstrated a method for rigorous monitoring of wind turbine sound. The goal of the method was to establish evidence for the condition noted by Karl D. Kryter: “The most direct, and perhaps most valid, insight into the possible presence and magnitude of stress reactions in general living environments is probably that which has been obtained from attitude surveys and real-life behaviour of people.” Behaviours such as walking away from an unsold loved home to live at the home of a family member, or when normal people become activists in trying to communicate their concerns provide such valid insights. The rigorous method had to consider the present acceptance criterion for wind turbines, in light of the insight given by those who study the quality of noise and its relation to annoyance. Those who study the subject identify that, “Current acceptance criterion relying on sound pressure levels averaged over long time periods and suppressing all aspects of quality cannot identify the specific properties of environmental noise situations.”

The results reported by Bill Palmer are typical of the community testing being undertaken in many communities near wind turbine projects across Ontario.

These findings indicate that the complex processes used by the MOECC and required of wind companies for compliance testing fail to identify key issues that can be quickly identified using much simpler techniques.

Meanwhile, the turbines, shown by other methods to be out of compliance, continue to operate.

 

Comments

Pat Cusack
Reply

Given that these tests need to be monitored over extended periods of time would it make sense that the same kind of monitoring should take place prior to any installation?

Jd
Reply

Is it by chance that the required long term testing would take about 20 years to complete at each location. Like a third world governance.

whooper
Reply

Likely written by and for the wind industry! Who ever approved this ridiculous compliance protocol should be out of a job! The MOECC can make changes to the protocols however, it appears they only listen to wind industry suggestions!

Sommer
Reply

The efforts made by residents in the K2 Wind project to communicate the fact that the policies and protocol of the MOECC were inadequate to protect people from harm were enormous. Emails were sent to a long list of people who were collectively responsible for the harm being caused. Despite the honest feedback residents were giving, the policies and protocols were repeated and defended by people within the MOECC. The disrespect these residents have been subjected to is absolutely inexcusable.

Richard Mann
Reply

Please find below my letter I wrote to Huron County Health Unit in December, 2016. I just received that they are still working on “ethics approval” the health investigation. This all began more than one year ago, in March 2016, when citizens appeared before their Health Board and a investigation was started.

———————

December 5, 2016

Erica Clark, PhD
Epidemiologist, Huron County Health Unit
77722B London Rd., RR #5
Clinton, ON N0M 1L0

Dear Erica Clark,

Thank you for taking the time to talk with me on Nov 29th.

I wanted to follow up with a summary of how I became involved in this issue, the direction and current status of my research, and my position on the issue of study of, and response to, the human health effects caused by exposure to Industrial wind turbines.

1: How I became involved.

I first became aware of this issue in May of 2013 after reading a paper by Carmen Krogh dealing with adverse health effects caused by Industrial Wind Turbines (link).

I came to believe that what was needed was a way to actually test consenting humans by exposing them to infrasound in a lab setting and to scientifically document the effects of this exposure.

2: Direction and current status of my research.

I started my research by working to develop the best infrasound recording method possible. In partnership with Professor John Vanderkooy, we developed a method of measuring infrasound from a single turbine, thereby isolating our results from the “clutter” of other turbines, wind noise, and other “pollutants”.

We published our work and our paper was accepted for presentation at Wind Turbine Noise 2015, INCE/EUROPE, in Glasgow, Scotland in April 2015 (link).

The next step was to design and build a method of producing infrasound in a lab setting. To be a useful research tool this infrasound needed to be identical to that produced by IWT’s.

This required the mathematical and computational research necessary to generate Sound Wave output to an exact duplicate of input data, namely actual turbine recordings previously captured.

This would finally allow others at the university, with appropriate medical training and ethics approval, to scientifically test and document the effects of infrasound produced by IWT’s on consenting humans.

I received university funding for this research from both the Department of Computer Science and the Office of Research in October 2015 which has allowed me to proceed.

My research over the next six months led to the building of prototype #1, a proof of concept device which was able to produce infrasound in a lab setting in the range produced by IWT’s, within a small test chamber.

The system consists of 3 main components: a controllable pressure source, a modulation device that is responsive to input commands, and measurement, analysis, and recording technology.

Prototype #2 is a fourfold scaled up chamber version of the proof of concept device and successfully produces infrasound in response to input commands. Prototype #2 is currently being used to refine design, data collection, and analysis.

Work is currently well along on version #3, a full scale chamber, capable of accommodating a human subject. This will finally allow others at the university with appropriate ethics approval and medical training to test the effect of infrasound on consenting human subjects.

3: My current position

I have kept up to date on the most recent scientific evidence on harm in humans and animals relative to IWT’s

There have also been many surveys and studies regarding human health effects related to Industrial Wind Turbine exposure. Sadly many of them have actually increased suffering by concluding that the subjects were imagining their symptoms, and by varying degrees, labeling them with the “It’s all in your head” designation.

It is also of note that while many people did agree to participate in these surveys and studies in the hope that their concerns would be heard, they were certainly captive participants by being forced to live in proximity to the turbines.

This leads me to my use of the word “ethics” and my beliefs regarding the study and information gathering of a captive group of humans who are currently living in proximity to potential health effects.

I remember during my first year of engineering we were told about an oath and ring ceremony that professional engineers take prior to receiving their accreditation.

These practices vary within different disciplines but two examples come readily to mind:

The National Society of Professional Engineers (USA) states “Engineers, in the fulfillment of their professional duties, shall: Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public”.

Professional Engineers Ontario states: “A practitioner shall, regard the practitioner’s duty to the public welfare as paramount”

I believe as scientists and researchers, while we were not actually required to pledge to such an oath, we certainly have a basic moral obligation when we choose to interact with people who are suffering.

At a minimum, this should be to clearly point out both the risks and benefits of interacting with us and to provide referrals to resources and other help related to their suffering. This should be the core principle of any such undertaking and certainly a legally mandated one by any board of health.

Thank you again for taking the time to talk with me and if I can be of any help going forward please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Richard Mann
Associate Professor
School of Computer Science
Faculty of Mathematics
University of Waterloo

Richard Mann
Reply

For an update on the Health Impacts of Wind Turbines, here is a talk by Carmen Krogh, speaking at University of Waterloo.
https://livestream.com/itmsstudio/events/7194480

DATE: Wednesday, March 29, 2017
TIME: 10:00 AM to 11:30 AM
LOCATION: DC 1302, University of Waterloo.

TITLE: Industrial wind turbines can harm humans
PRESENTER: Carmen M Krogh

ABSTRACT:
The topic of the risk of harm to human health associated with wind energy facilities is controversial and debated worldwide. On May 7, 2014, Carmen Krogh presented a seminar at the University of Waterloo which considered some of the research dating back to the early 1980’s. A snapshot of some of the current research available in 2014 was provided. The research is challenged in part by the complexities and numerous variables and knowledge gaps associated with this subject. This presentation will explore some of these research challenges and provide an update on the growing body of evidence regarding human health risk factors. Included will be the emerging research indicating risks to those working in this field.

BIO:
Carmen M Krogh is a full time volunteer and published researcher regarding health effects and industrial wind energy facilities and shares information with communities; individuals; federal, provincial and public health authorities, wind energy developers; the industry; and others. She is an author and a co-author of peer reviewed articles and conference papers presented at wind turbine scientific noise conferences. Ms Krogh is a retired pharmacist whose career includes: senior executive positions at a teaching hospital (Director of Pharmacy); a drug information researcher at another teaching hospital; a Director of a professional organization; and a Director (A) at Health Canada (PMRA). She is the former Director of Publications and Editor in Chief of the Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties (CPS), the book used by physicians, nurses, and health professionals for prescribing information in Canada.

Notinduttondunwich
Reply

1.8 % wind
1.3% solar
2005 MW export this hour….
2673 HOMES… FREE HYDRO FOR ONE MONTH!!
IN ONE HOUR!!!

Sommer
Reply

Essentially, what we’ve witnessed is this government and its agents have been participating in a human experiment, without having requested the consent of participants. This is a human rights violation. It is unethical.
No one wants to discuss the Nuremberg Code violations and yet the Nuremberg Code has formed the guidelines of ethical research in Canada.
Residents implored that this experiment be stopped many, many times. Each time the turbines stopped moving they hoped it was forever. Each time they started again, the same sense of fear and dread overwhelmed them. Being compelled to leave one’s home is a serious stressor. Writing emails or phoning the HOTLINE seemed pointless, so some gave up doing that.
If we are to believe that the MOECC will indeed admit that their compliance protocol is inadequate and that they will take the necessary steps to ensure the safety of all residents, and if the MOECC will act rapidly to respond the every one who reports harm, then perhaps people will regain some faith in this ministry.
Thanks to real leaders like Bill Palmer, Professor Richard Mann, Mike Jankowski and all who are working so hard to analyze this situation with precision and to honour the residents whose lives have been seriously distressed.
It is absolutely ironic that the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change has allowed the environment of rural residents to be ruined by industrial wind turbines that have failed to pass the test of efficacy in their intended performance regarding changing the climate. The issue of climate change mitigation is a subject the MOECC still refuses to examine.
It is horrible to think about the cost that our children will have to bear because of this experiment. It is even worse to think about the psychological and physical damage that people are enduring right now. In a country where we proudly make pro-health choices to prevent disease on a daily basis, this story takes on demonic proportions.

Sommer
Reply

Curtin Devlin was right 4 years ago when he spoke about this human rights violation.

Sommer
Reply

My apologies for misspelling Curt Devlin’s name.

Richard Mann
Reply

Dear WCO:
I have updated my webpage to include my correspondence with Erica Clark. I published the letter here, but it is “awaiting moderation”.
You can find these on my web page.
Thanks,
Richard

– Correspondence from Erica Clark, Huron County Health Unit, May 12, 2017. Email (text).
– Correspondence from Erica Clark, Huron County Health Unit, May 2, 2017. Email (text).

Wind Concerns Ontario
Reply

It was unrealistic to expect the Huron County MoH to be able to issue an order to have wind turbines stop operating. This isn’t a hamburger restaurant that made a few people sick, this is a huge undertaking. Huron County Health Unit is conducting a public health investigation under appropriate legislation, and will report the findings according to public health practice, at which time it will be up to the Government of Ontario to act accordingly. The Director of the MOECC has the authority to issue a Stop Order.

Sommer
Reply

The cruel irony is that, residents lost their faith in the MOECC because of the way the MOECC bungled their effort to protect them from even just the noise. They relied on their policy protocol even though people were telling them that their protocol policy was inadequate.The MOECC consistently dismissed low frequency noise modulations and infrasound issues, without interceding to get this government, at whatever level necessary, to enforce the radiation emitting devices act.
Residents being harmed submitted their awareness of the reality that the harm they were experiencing was the same as what has been/is being experienced by people around the world. These symptoms are listed on the Waubra Foundation website. They knew from direct experience that the harm they were experiencing started when the turbines were turned on and when the turbines were off, or when they left their homes and got far enough away from the turbines, they felt enormous relief.
It seemed unrealistic to expect the MOECC, after all of the effort put forth to no avail, to issue a Stop Order. Minister Murray along with over 50 other names of people who are collectively responsible should have worked together to correct this situation without forcing people to endure further harm.
People who are not experiencing the harm directly have callously objectified those who are. There area few exceptions, thankfully, and the compassion they have the capacity to express and work with the goal of bringing an expedient end to this torture is greatly appreciated.
Delay tactics are not acceptable.

Rural101
Reply

Heather Pollard (MOE Owen Sound) at Armow ERT 2014
Pollard said her office has received complaints about six of the seven wind projects, mostly related to wind turbine noise and health effects.
“People have indicated they are having sleep disturbance, headaches, nausea, vertigo, tinnitus – symptoms they attribute to the wind farm,” she said. “We can follow up on the noise complaints but we have no expertise with health effects.”….

The final step, she said is an acoustic audit.
“If that is required, can you shut down the turbines?” asked James.
“We have not done so,” said Pollard, “and it’s unlikely we could do that.”

http://www.saugeentimes.com/39%20y/Pollard%20testifies%20at%20hearing%20jan%2010,%202014/Template.htm

Sommer
Reply

It’s time to look at this situation with crystal clarity and within the ethical context that the Nuremberg Code has guided policy in this country.

Notinduttondunwich
Reply

It’s so absolutely ridiculous to read those comments…. we have been rendered powerless to protect ourselves and the environment from the people we pay to protect the environment……. from us!!!
So discouraging……

Barbara
Reply

Follow the money and the political influence behind this situation and then it becomes understandable why the IWTs have not been shut down.

Sommer
Reply

So, if following the money and political influence will give people the answer to why the turbines are still running and harming people, then why have residents been being encouraged to call the SPILL HOTLINE, get a reference number, wait for officers to come to capture audible noise, spend years in this ridiculously frustrating process, contacting their MP to put pressure on the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Queen’s Park because audible noise has finally been captured by the MOECC officer, only to have residents endure the frustration of even more delays?
Why were residents encouraged to go the their Health Unit for protection in having the turbines declared a community health hazard? ?
Why are residents encouraged to participate in research studies and projects that will have them being harmed longer and longer?
Are you saying that these people have to wait for an election to get rid of these politicians? This is more delay…more harm.

Barbara
Reply

People need to know what’s taking place behind the scenes. Where the money and the influence is. UN involvement.

IWT projects require big bucks and the owners, financial backers, investors, and other parties involved in the wind industry don’t want IWTs shut down.

Then there are United Nations commitments for renewable energy targets.

Banks, insurance industry, pension funds, investment companies that already have committed money to finance renewable energy projects.

IMO, it’s already too late for another election. Will be just another year
of digging the hole deeper.

Sommer
Reply

So, Barbara, what are you saying here to the residents/landowners who did not consent to having members of their family or themselves harmed by noise, low frequency noise modulations and infrasound?
Surely you are not a proponent for forced relocation.
I agree with what you’ve said above. These connections are being exposed and seriously reexamined by people around the world. I know you are well aware of all of this and I appreciate the research you have done to educate people about how this all happened. However, there are necessary changes that need to be made as quickly as possible to protect the people being harmed. This is an ethical crisis.

Sommer
Reply

The days of denial that turbines are causing harm to people nearby are coming to a rapid close:
https://stopthesethings.com/2017/05/21/swedish-study-proves-pulsing-low-frequency-wind-turbine-noise-causes-sleep-deprivation/

Callously ignoring the anecdotal evidence people in Ontario have been reporting, to all who are responsible for this harm to them and their families is absolutely unacceptable. Objectifying these people is the response of those who lack compassion.
People trusted the wind companies when they said no one would be harmed. They trusted their paid and elected leaders to protect them when they discovered the frightening reality that once the turbines were turned on, all sort of changes occurred to their health.
This is a very serious situation.

Sommer
Reply

Also, take a look at this:

Imprimer
International Press release
European Platform against Wind Farms (EPAW) and French Fédération Environnement Durable
Paris 19/05/2017

The French Academy of Medicine confirmed that wind turbines cause a disease named: “Wind Turbine Syndrome”

It is characterized by a visual, sonorous and psychological impairment.

The French Academy of Medicine heard the Fédération Environment Durable which had publish a report gathering a sample of hundreds of testimonies of French residents showing major symptoms of disorders as well as an international synthesis report on health studies and risk assessments concerning this phenomenon.
In its report published on May 9, 2017 (1) The French Academy of Medicine has concluded that wind turbines seriously affect the well-being and health of the inhabitants.

– Hearing disorders: the noise generated by the wind turbine consists in part of infrasound. Inaudible by the human, these make no more noise than the beating of the heart transmitted in our body by the inner ear. But by causing “phenomena of resonance in the thoracic cavities or of the pulsations felt,” this infrasound may be translated into vibrations, which are constant and therefore irritating;

– Visual fragility: Fractional light stimulation due to the rotation of the blades can induce an
Epileptic risk. The flashing of traffic lights also disrupts the visual comfort of frail people;

A psychological sensitivity manifested by the deterioration of the quality of sleep, episodes of stress, depression, anxiety, memory problems, loss of interest for others, a decrease in professional performance.

Barbara
Reply

People need to know why IWTs won’t be shut down by this present government. Financial interests and political influence behind the wind industry in Ontario is great.

No one knew about the Ontario government participation in the UNEP-FI “Canada Roadmap” project? UNEP-FI is where the money is and also political influence.

And money coming in from Geneva, Switzerland to Ontario and the rest of Canada?

Geneva, Switzerland is a convenient place to make money deposits and withdrawals.

If a new Ontario government is elected in 2018, they will have pile of issues to deal with.

IMO, other political parties who try to stand against this have much financial and political pressure applied to them from many sources.

Richard Mann
Reply

Dear “Barbara”.

You say “People need to know why IWTs won’t be shut down by this present government.”

Why not? One minute you’re saying the current government will not move on this. Then you say any new government will have the same pressures.

We need to apply constant pressure, to both the Wind proponents and the governments who enable them.

Also, I would really like to know who you and others are. It is getting tiring using all these screen names.

Richard

Barbara
Reply

IMO, constant pressure should be kept up on shutting IWTs down.

It’s only my opinion, that the present government will not shut down IWTs and why.

Also it’s my opinion that a new government would be subjected to the same kinds of pressure.

All I do is look up information which may or may not be useful in the present situation.

Sommer
Reply

“IMO, constant pressure should be kept up on shutting IWTs down.”

Thank you for this statement, Barbara.. I sincerely hope that your opinion that this present government will not shut down IWT’S is wrong especially considering the information that is piling in from Germany, Sweden and France which confirm that the Health Canada study was woefully inadequate. The MOECC’s attitude of dismissal of noise as an ‘annoyance’ affecting people’s psychological and physical health has created a crisis. Watching Minister Glen Murray display his ignorance of the efforts of people who have been/are being harmed when we know that his office has received so many emails reporting this harm, was sickening.

If this government or a new government is under pressure from banks, insurance industry, pension funds, investment companies and the U.N, then they will have to deal with that. There are people from many different countries coming to the clear realization that this industrial scale wind experiment has been an abject failure.
In Huron County, we have the Alberta Teacher’s Pension Fund benefitting from the harm being done by IWT’s. How must if feel to be one of those teachers who is benefitting from the harm done to innocent men, women and children in rural Ontario?
Your research has always been appreciated. I hope you will continue to educate people in this way and fill in the knowledge gaps that exist for people who are unaware of the complicit players behind this scam.

Barbara
Reply

FS-UNEP Collaborative Centre

‘Delivering the green economy through financial policy’ March 2014, 85 pages.

Includes the actions of governments to create the “green economy”.

http://fs-unep-centre.org/sites/default/files/project/299/unep_inquiry_green_economy_through_financial_policy.pdf

In the U.S., this includes the PTC/Production Tax Credit. No PTC in Canada.

Another example of an activity that is taking place far away from here that people have no knowledge of.

Sommer

Yes, the Canadian connections to industrial wind turbines will need to make the necessary changes. This will be happening in many different countries where turbines have been sited too close to peoples’ homes. Keep in mind that NAPAW and EPAW are large, active networks of people exposing the industrial scale wind industry. The ‘writing is on the wall’ for people who have benefitted from harming others. In civilized countries we don’t accept this model. In a culture where people are constantly being encouraged to make pro-health choices to prevent disease, the idea that a government can impose a dangerous situation on people in their own homes is obnoxious. Forced relocation is scorned in Canada. The sooner the people who are benefitting somehow from this fiasco make the necessary changes, the better. There are ethical investments.
Take a look at this article which was recently published:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/08/science-deniers-in-the-wind-industry/
Lawsuits will follow, if things don’t change soon. Evidence of ‘neglect of duty’ is being archived.

Barbara

FS UNEP

Frankfurt School UNEP Collaborating Centre for Climate & Sustainable Energy Finance, Germany

Partners:

UNEP

Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety, Germany

http://www.fs-unep-centre.org

Leave a comment

name*

email* (not published)

website