New noise audits recommended for K2 wind farm neighbours

MOECC admission of ‘tonality’ a step forward but more action needed

K2 Wind: testing shows noise above regulations … and more? [Photo by Owen Sound Sun-Times]
April 8

(C) Wind Concerns Ontario

Residents living near the K2 wind power project in the Township of Ashfield-Colborne-Wawanosh have received a report from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change following noise testing done at their property, Wind Concerns Ontario has learned.

WCO received a copy of the MOECC report and other correspondence from the residents, who are members of the coalition of Ontario community groups and individuals in Ontario concerned about the impact of wind turbines on the economy, natural environment, and human health.

The noise testing was done at their request, connected to complaints made to the MOECC about excessive noise and sound pressure or vibration being emitted from industrial-scale wind turbines at the K2 power project.

The MOECC report’s Executive Summary states that

Based on the results of the analysis, it is acknowledged that sound from the wind turbines was audible during the measuring campaign at levels that appear to exceed the applicable sound level limits, and based on C3 measurements conducted at a nearby receptor (the distance is about 1250 m from R876; where the same turbine(s) within 1500 m distance impact both receptors) it was further concluded that there is a possibility that sound from the nearby turbines could be tonal. To confirm compliance, it is recommended that a tonal audibility assessment and detailed noise audit be undertaken in accordance with Part D of the draft Compliance Protocol for Wind Turbines Noise, NPC 350, 2017.

This is remarkable as it is the first time MOECC supervisory staff have admitted to “tonality” in wind turbine noise emissions. And also because, in previous noise testing by the MOECC, the Ministry claimed results were “inconclusive” due to other noises such as birds chirping and tree leaf movement.

A tonal audibility assessment is a step forward.

Is it enough?

No.

The Ministry needs to acknowledge that there is a problem with wind turbine noise emissions, and in the case of this particular report and recommendation, immediate action is required, including comprehensive testing including for infrasound which was excluded by the equipment used for these tests.

It is time for government to accept responsibility for its wind power program and the impacts on people who were given no choice but to live with them.

Wind Concerns Ontario

 

 

 

Comments

Sommer
Reply

David, could you tell me what, if anything, has ever been done about your situation?

David Libby
Reply

Enbridge shut the 2 turbines down for 1-2 months and changed the gearboxes. It didn’t make any difference. I don’t know why they thought it would help.

Sommer
Reply

“The Ministry needs to acknowledge that there is a problem with wind turbine noise emissions, and in the case of this particular report and recommendation, immediate action is required, including comprehensive testing including for infrasound which was excluded by the equipment used for these tests.”
This situation came about after these residents have sent many, many complaints to all who are responsible for this situation. Of course, the MOECC was in that list. These complaints were sent for almost two full years since the turbines started running.
The MOECC has refused to deal with low frequency noise modulations and infrasound radiation. Residents have described the harm they have experienced from audible and inaudible sound waves and have asked that the Radiation Emitting Devices Act be enforced…to no avail.
Now, if the turbines near their home are curtailed, there will be a reduction in the harm from infrasound.
Surely, the rest of the residents who are being harmed won’t have to suffer through the MOECC’s mismanagement in order to have turbines near their homes curtailed as well. Residents need to be protected as quickly as possible.

Wind Concerns Ontario
Reply

Thank you. We urge people who have made complaints in the past to continue to make them, and to make sure an

    Incident Report number

is provided at the time of each call. The Ministry calls these reports “Pollution Incident Reports” internally, and it is important to keep calling. Or writing. The most effective reports are those in which the caller describes the weather conditions, the time, location, and an assessment of the noise/sensation on a scale of 1 to 10. Although the caller may feel very upset at the time of the call, it is important (and effective) to remain calm and provide the details.

Sommer
Reply

If the MOECC acts quickly in response to noise complaints now and those who have lost hope in the MOECC ever protecting them from the loss of their safe, secure and pleasurable environment at their homes and on their farms, start to report to the SPILL HOTLINE and demand action, this ought to be the fastest way to seek protection for those who are in similar states of distress. Curtailing or turning off the turbines will end the harm from low frequency noise modulations and infrasound radiation. The whole idea of a year or two or three more of this is absolutely ethically unacceptable.
Is the MOECC equipped with enough officers and enough proper equipment to finally do their job?
For people who do not have audible noise issues, but are experiencing harm from inaudible noise, the pressure for enforcing the Radiation Emitting Devices Act by the Federal government must be intensified.

Wind Concerns Ontario
Reply

WCO advises that if you are experiencing adverse effects from noise/vibration from wind turbines, you call the Spills Action Centre at 1-800-268-6060. MAKE SURE YOU ARE GIVEN AN INCIDENT REPORT NUMBER. During business hours the central office will refer you to a District Office; if you have called before and know the District Office number you may call there but again, be sure to get AN INCIDENT REPORT NUMBER. When calling, give the person you are speaking to your name and phone number; your location, direction of the wind, speed of the wind if you have it, your location relative to the nearest turbine or turbines, and finally a rating of the noise 1-10, with 10 being the most severe. Please be polite at all times with the staff.

David Libby
Reply

Send your complaints to the investors relations department as well. If the birdchopping company is a publicly traded company.

Notinduttondunwich
Reply

No checks” in the system

An article recently appeared in the Globe and Mail written by George Vegh, former general counsel to the OEB. This paragraph is perhaps why Premier Wynne admitted to her “mistake”

“Generation procurements are determined entirely by the government. The system operator – the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) – implements government directives. Neither the Ontario Energy Board nor any other independent regulator reviews these procurements. There are no independent criteria, no cost-benefit analysis, no consideration of the need for the procurements, and no review of alternatives. In short, there is virtually no check on the power to procure supply.”

Barbara
Reply

Ontario has high electricity prices and carbon taxes. Not a good place to do business.

Michigan faces an electricity supply shortage if the state can’t find electricity supplies elsewhere. Many Michigan business have already agreed to curtail their electricity use if needed. Not a promising place to do business. Groups such as EarthJustice and the U.S. Sierra Club forced Michigan coal fired plants to shut down. If just one of Michigan’s nuclear plants goes offline for any reason, Michigan will suffer even more of an electricity shortage.

Notinduttondunwich
Reply

Minister to be notified of non-compliance or defect

6 (1) Where a person who is the manufacturer or importer of a radiation emitting device becomes aware, after the device has left the person’s premises, of the fact that the device

(a) does not comply with the standards, if any, prescribed under paragraph 13(1)(b) and applicable thereto, or

(b) creates a risk to any individual of genetic or personal injury, impairment of health or death from radiation by reason of the fact that it

(i) does not perform according to the performance characteristics claimed for it,

(ii) does not accomplish its claimed purpose, or

(iii) emits radiation that is not necessary in order for it to accomplish its claimed purpose,

the person shall forthwith notify the Minister.

Sommer
Reply

Is this a Federal Statute intended to protect all Canadians from devices that emit radiation?

Notinduttondunwich
Reply

Radiation Emitting Devices Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. R-1)

Notinduttondunwich
Reply

Radiation Emitting Devices Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. R-1).

Richard Mann
Reply

Please find attached my letter to Erica Clark on December 5th 2016.
Richard
————————————-

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

Tracy
Reply

Hi Richard,
It was nice to meet you and your family earlier this spring.
I am very grateful for your undertaking. You are a brilliant, decent human being; a rare breed in today’s society.
I can’t wait for the day the Liberals are kicked to the curb and Ontario will be beautiful again! It will happen.
Your efforts and expertise is very much appreciated.

whooper
Reply

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4NA2icxqHg
(go to min. 3:22)

On April 12, 2017, MPP Lisa Thompson questions the Environment Minister on IWTs operating outside compliance for noise levels. Minister Glen Murray responds: “But, Mr. Speaker, it is passing strange to me that I never get a question when they were in power about Mercury in “Grassy Narrows” and I never get a question about nuclear power and I never get a question about Coal Plant Pollution.”

Is Glenn Murray comparing the long term health impacts/ human cost of mercury pollution, radiation poisoning and coal pollution to that of infra-sound pollution?

Are the liberals implying it is okay to repeat the mistakes of the past? Are the liberals justifying not doing the right thing because others did not do the right thing in the past? Do they not understand that two wrongs don’t make a right?

Why is Glenn Murray, the MOECC and the liberal government moving full steam ahead with this failed energy policy when they know people are suffering? Why is the liberal government putting politics before health?

Sommer
Reply

Great questions!
Why is Glenn Murray acting as if he is completely unaware of the many, many letters of complaint about harm from noise, low frequency noise modulations and infrasound when those letters were sent to his office?
His reaction was a disgrace!

Notinduttondunwich
Reply

Barbara…. Glenny Glen Glen Thibeault has signed contracts with Michigan already… as Ontarions we now are on the hook to supply Michigan with guaranteed electricity… as you know the lieberals will look after everyone else but the very people they are suppose to be serving… rolling blackouts will become the norm as we guarantee Michigan it’s power under the lieberals new Green Energy Export Market….

whooper
Reply

Canada is such a beautiful country and to be turned into a littered, wind turbine “plantation” for the U.S. is a travesty!

Notinduttondunwich
Reply

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26518593

So basically how these studies are done is by excluding the most vulnerable and certain age groups from our selection… then if you test it’s only to a certain decibel reading… which ironically is just below the MOECC standards…. so we have another successful test…..
good dog… if I was those folks living under the turdbines I would have an excellent court defence as to why I toppled the turdbines…

Stan Thayer
Reply

So, some of the IWT’s from France were found to have PCB’s. You cannot install them here they said,(in french). The Texas shareholder said, let’s send them to Canada, they bought no good diesel powered submarines from Britain.
Well folks here they come!
I think we should put at least one in Port Burwell beside the submarine.
The town can can put a door in it and charge admission to go through it like the submarine.
THIS IS NOT A JOKE!
Stan Thayer

Stan Thayer
Reply

Hey Dave Libby. Those gearboxes were changed to appease the workers and probably the WSIB. No one wants a long drawn out and expensive death by polychlorinated-bypheenils.
Name withheld. Nobody listens to me anyway!

Leave a comment

name*

email* (not published)

website