Join
Menu
Join

WIND CONCERNS ONTARIO

MOECC fails to act on wind turbine noise: CTV report

Turbines in K2 Wind power project were found to be out of compliance with Ontario regulations months ago. Since then, the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change has done nothing, says a report by CTV News London.
http://london.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=104066
September 13, 2017
Last spring, the MOECC determined that several industrial-scale wind turbines in the K2 Wind power development near Goderich, Ontario were operating out of compliance. This was the result of noise testing done by the Ministry, following numerous complaints by residents.
Former minister Glen Murray had promised action, saying there are rules to be followed, and his department would make sure they were.
Months later, nothing has been done. And residents continue to file reports of excessive noise and vibration daily.
In a report by Scott Miller of CTV London resident Mike Stachura says, “Nothing has changed…This is our home, we have to live here and we keep hoping the government will do something to help.”
Huron-Bruce MPP Lisa Thompson raised the issue in the Legislature Tuesday, asking new minister Chris Ballard when the Wynne government was going to take action to protect residents’ health. The minister responded with criticism of the Opposition, and reverted to the government’s green energy mantra.
 

What's your reaction?
0Cool0Upset0Love0Lol
Tags:

Related Posts

Robber barons and policy defiance: what ...
September 26, 2022EnergyIESOWind energyWind Power Ontario
Victory for environment, community at Ostrander ...
June 6, 2016Cost Benefit Wind Powerendangered species OntarioEnvironmentERTGreen Energy ActIBA (Important Bird Area)LegalWind Power Ontario

45 Comments

  • ron Hartlen
    Posted September 14, 2017 7:51 am 0Likes

    What’s needed is to install audio systems in the offices of the Premier, of the Minister of Climate Change and the Minister of Health. The speakers would emit WT sound (not just the audible, but also infrasound if that is technically do-able.
    Perhaps Lisa should challenge the Premier to agree to this.

    Reply
  • Sommer
    Posted September 14, 2017 8:03 am 0Likes

    It is obviously time to think ‘outside of the box’ in order to get through to all who are responsible in this government for neglect of duty to protect. The system is rigged to protect the wind companies and government agents.

    Reply
  • Sommer
    Posted September 14, 2017 8:07 am 0Likes

    Here is an important breakthrough development on a project where clusters of turbines surround people’s homes as they do in Huron County:
    2-15-17
    Brown County Board of Supervisor meeting Comments from the Public
    Chairman Moynihan:
    Dr. Coussons, please state your name and address for the record please.
    Dr. Coussons:
    Herb Coussons, 6649 Ledgetop Drive in Greenleaf.
    So a little bit of background and why I’m here to speak. I’ve been in practice in Green Bay since 2002. I’m originally from Louisiana and finished medical school in 1992 so I’ve been in practice for 25 years, mostly in primary care. Prior to coming here I practiced in the Pacific Northwest, I was on the faculty of the University of Idaho and Washington State. I’m on the faculty of the new medical college here in Green Bay, at the Medical College of Wisconsin.
    I’m also a private pilot and I was a pilot since 1992 and have gone through all of the ratings all the way through airline pilot and have a particular interest in the physiology and science behind spacial disorientation. I also teach and consult around the United States.
    I also would like to state that I have no conflicts of interest, no financial disclosures. I’m not paid to be here and I’m not here to represent anybody.
    I also would like to say, since this is on wind energy and it is a controversial topic, I am very pro-American energy, whether that’s carbon or green, it doesn’t really matter, but I have some particular opinions about this topic. And I am presenting because I think that there is some overwhelming science behind the link to health issues, particularly
    in our local area with Shirley and even further south, Fond du Lac, but as it applies to this Board, Shirley, with the complaints that have come from south Brown County, and I have personally seen and taken care of six of these patients.
    So I would like to point out the difference between a syndrome and a disease (you can follow along if you want to), but a syndrome is just a group of symptoms with no seemingly cohesive thing that draws them together or explanation for why they occur together. And this is where there is a lot of misunderstanding when wind turbine syndrome gets thrown around.
    Well, I would like to point out that now I think it is a recognized disease, where a disease is a specific disorder with a pathologic or physiologic explanation. So now we classify this as vibro-acoustic
    disease, and last year with the new CMS guidelines encoding, there is a new code T 75.2 which is the effects of vibration and there is a specific code now listed, vertigo from infrasound. It is a diagnosis and it is a disease.
    I printed some abstracts for you and the most, I think, telling one is about vibro- acoustic disease. And vibro-asoustic disease has now been autopsy-proven to show soft tissue proliferation, particularly collagen and fibro-elastic tissue that causes heart problems, hypertension, and other physiologic proven findings. This is not isolated to wind turbines. This is in any instance of prolonged exposure to low- frequency noise, infrasound as we call it. And it applies in aeronautics too, from low frequency noise, that’s how I came upon these studies. It causes thickening of cardiovascular structures and potentially
    early death. There’ve even been some links to chromosomal damage and increased malignancies in these patients. And I would grant that there is an inadequacy of studies linking this to wind noise but without a doubt the frequency ranges that affect these individuals in both human and animal studies are the same frequencies that have been measured in the Shirley project.
    The second one shows what those frequencies are, 0-20 Hz range. Low frequency, infrasound, ILFN, all the same thing. And I won’t get into the details there. You can read it and I can email you a copy of this if you would like it. But it is echocardiography, brain MRI, and histologically proven in autopsies of both animals and humans.
    Other supporting evidence: sleep
    disturbance alone is enough to cause health problems. That’s why we have CPAP to treat sleep apnea patients, because they develop obesity, hypertension, right-sided heart failure, as well as other psychologic issues.
    The next one, the theory to explain some physiologic effects of infrasonic emissions at some wind farm sites, includes measurements in our own back yard in the Shirley project because it’s been one of the most studied around.
    The next one was published in Canada and I would point to the conclusion of the study. Now that so many indicators point to infrasound as a potential agent of adverse health effects it is critical to re-examine the approach to this aspect of wind turbine operation, revise regulations immediately and implement protective public health
    measures based on a precautionary principle.
    So, epidemiology. This gets pushed out there quite a bit. Why are there no epidemiologic studies, or we need to have more studies is the conclusion of every study.
    So, first of all, the FDA is responsible for safety and effectiveness of health altering devices. That could be a surgical device, a drug, or anything like that, whereas OSHA is responsible for things that are environmental, that people may be exposed to. So there is a little bit of a conflict or struggle at a federal level between the FDA and OSHA.
    Next is, there are things called IRB’s, institutional review boards. So, medical research was unethical prior to the
    implementation of restrictions on human subject protections. There are animal studies, there are models, and there are other types of studies, but it is very difficult in any circumstances to point to a direct causal effect, or anything causing any disease, and I’m going to point that out in a subsequent slide.
    So what study designs do we have? Case reports – somebody says, this bothers me. Next, cross sectional surveys – we’re going to go out and survey lots of people in an area. Next, we’re going to say, case controlled studies – we’re going to measure affected vs non-affected individuals. Cohort studies – groups of individuals against groups of individuals, maybe even in different neighborhoods or different states. Next would be a randomized control trial and then a meta analysis which is pooled groups of studies to get substantial
    numbers to prove a point when small numbers don’t prove a point.
    Well, what do we have with wind? We have case reports, cross sectional surveys, case control studies, cohort studies including crossover, but we have no randomized control trials. What’s interesting is the wind industry also has no randomized control trials that are independent, not industry funded, and that are peer-reviewed. So, those types of things that claim safety, there’s just as much lack of evidence to stand on that claim as they say that the opposition, people who suffer adverse health effects have.
    We will never actually see a randomize control study for wind. The reason why is there are ethical concerns with these studies. There’s enough out there to say that there are potential adverse health
    effects. There will never be a study. What would be an example of this? An example would be, and I printed something from a nephrology journal, that shows why there are no randomized control studies in some disease states, and the example is smoking. There are no randomized control studies that say that smoking causes adverse health effects, none, zero. But, we warn people, we tax them, there are lawsuits against them, there’s plenty of information and it’s commonly accepted that there is a causal link between smoking and lung cancer.
    So in summary, I think we now have three decades of reports of adverse health effects, research has shown that infrasound and low frequency noise cause disturbances both in sleep and in physiologic direct link causal effects, the range of low frequency noise that’s been
    proven to cause these are measured in the wind turbine developments, vibro-acoustic disease is now a proven entity, and over 90 worldwide professionals and medical researchers that aren’t linked to any type of industry conflict would agree to that and have signed onto that statement. And now Shirley Wind is one of the most studied and documented industrial wind turbine developments in the United States and we have those affected individuals that we see in our own backyard.
    So the conclusion, I am concerned, based on the patients that I’ve seen, that our local residents are being harmed by a very real risk of low frequency noise, some of which may not be seen or known for a decade or years to come. An example of this would be sun. It’s a wave form of energy and no one would disagree that UV light or infrared energy affects different people in different
    ways. I’m much more likely to burn than some of you in the room because I’m quite pale. So, there are people who are more susceptible, but that doesn’t deny the fact that they are affected. And I’m concerned also that with the evidence in our local backyard that the Board and the County will be at risk for both liability and negligence with the amount of information that’s been presented here over the last five years.
    That’s about fifteen minutes of time and I would be open for questions or discussion to clarify any points because I breezed through that pretty quickly.

    Reply
  • Sommer
    Posted September 14, 2017 8:35 am 0Likes

    Please note this statement:
    “I’m concerned also that with the evidence in our local backyard that the Board and the County will be at risk for both liability and negligence with the amount of information that’s been presented here…”

    Reply
  • Francis
    Posted September 14, 2017 10:33 am 0Likes

    Sommer, that sentence hints at the only thing that I think has any hope of changing the dynamics around wind power – successful, large lawsuits. Hopefully, some smart people will find effective ways to sue the wind power developers, their suppliers, those who provide “homes” for the windmills, and, most importantly, any and all politicians involved in this giant and dangerous fraud.

    Reply
    • Barbara
      Posted September 15, 2017 10:57 am 0Likes

      This is where public/government – private company partnerships may come into play?

      Reply
  • Sommer
    Posted September 14, 2017 1:43 pm 0Likes

    Right now all government agents who are responsible for harm from industrial wind turbines need to receive letters of liability.

    Reply
  • Sommer
    Posted September 14, 2017 1:46 pm 0Likes

    Criminal negligence
    219 (1) Every one is criminally negligent who
    (a) in doing anything, or
    (b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do,
    shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons.
    Definition of duty
    (2) For the purposes of this section, duty means a duty imposed by law.
    R.S., c. C-34, s. 202.
    Set backs are an expropriation if they come across a property line. (the action by the state or an authority of taking property from its owner for public use or benefit)
    Mischief
    430 (1) Every one commits mischief who wilfully
    (a) destroys or damages property;
    (b) renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective;
    (c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property; or
    (d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property.
    SECTION WORDING
    180(1) Every one who commits a common nuisance and thereby (a) endangers the lives, safety or health of the public, or (b) causes physical injury to any person, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.

    Reply
  • Notinduttondunwich
    Posted September 14, 2017 2:29 pm 0Likes

    Clean Water Act (Ontario)
    The Clean Water Act (S.O. 2006, Chapter 22) is a law enacted by the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this Act is to protect existing and future sources of drinking water.
    The Clean Water Act, 2006 (Bill 43) is a major part of the Ontario government’s commitment to ensuring that every Ontarian has access to safe drinking water. Protecting water at its source is the first step in the multi-barrier approach to source water protection. By stopping contaminants from getting into sources of drinking water — lakes, rivers and aquifers — we can provide the first line of defense in the protection of our environment and the health of Ontarians. For the first time, communities will be required to create and carry out a plan to protect the sources of their municipal drinking water supplies. TheClean Water Act, 2006 will:
    Require local communities to look at the existing and potential threats to their water and set out and implement the actions necessary to reduce or eliminate significant threats.Empower communities to take action to prevent threats from becoming significant.Require public participation on every local source protection plan. This means everyone in the community gets a chance to contribute to the planning process.Require that all plans and actions are based on sound science.
    This legislation sets out a basic framework for the establishment of community-based groups that represent a cross section of sectors and geographic areas withinConservation Authority (Canada)boundaries. These community-based groups are called Source Protection Committees and there are 19 such groups across Ontario. The Clean Water Act, 2006also introduced the Ontario Drinking Water Stewardship Program (ODWSP) a financial assistance program for farmers, landowners and small or medium businesses for activities that reduce threats to municipal drinking water sources.
    You mean liablities like contaminating aquifers!!!!

    Reply
    • Sommer
      Posted September 15, 2017 12:29 pm 0Likes

      Yes, of course.
      Contaminating the environment with noise, low frequency noise modulations and infrasound radiation is a form of trespassing and the information is piling in on the harm it causes, both psychologically and physically, especially when turbines have been sited too close or in clusters surrounding homes.

      Reply
  • Notinduttondunwich
    Posted September 14, 2017 5:26 pm 0Likes

    http://globalnews.ca/news/3737281/canadas-wildlife-decline-wwf-canada-report/
    Me thinks that turdbines will hasten this!!!!

    Reply
  • Notinduttondunwich
    Posted September 15, 2017 4:43 pm 0Likes

    Hey Ron Hartnal… that is totally doable….. ill go to Cuba and investigate….
    blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2017/08/11/us-diplomats-cuba-device/#.Wbw7A68XbqA

    Reply
  • Notinduttondunwich
    Posted September 15, 2017 4:45 pm 0Likes

    http://www.salon.com/2017/

    Reply
  • Richard Mann
    Posted September 16, 2017 3:11 pm 0Likes

    An investigation into health impacts of wind turbines was initiated in March 2016. (Ontario’s HPPA, Health Protection and Promotion Act). Since then we have had one delay after another, and still no remedy for those living under turbines.
    As of Aug 14, 2017, Erica Clark informed me they have heard back from University of Waterloo ethics and have submitted another ethics application to address concerns raised.
    Meanwhile I have been told that all communications of the ethics board, including the names an positions of the applicants, is confidential.
    I am asking for transparency, and for immediate action on this urgent health issue.
    For further details, including correspondence and my own research on Infra sound and wind turbines, please see my web page below.
    Sincerely,
    Richard Mann
    Associate Professor, Computer Science
    University of Waterloo
    http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~mannr

    Reply
  • Stan Thayer
    Posted September 17, 2017 12:16 am 0Likes

    Sound pressure is transmitted much better through liquids than air. Imagine if you were a whale that communicates by sound in an ocean contaminated by sonar and neuron shattering waveforms. The only relief is to leave your ocean home and commit suicide. Whale pain is not unlike people pain. They do not know greed for money and cannot fight their oppressors. They are simply considered collateral damage.
    I cannot explain why some humans have no compassion and I have and will continue to do my best for all fellow earth dwellers.
    We do not need IWT’S in Ontario and I can prove that.
    Everyone must understand by now that the corrupt government system relies on donations from large corporate entities that create the need to supply the people they harm.
    From sperm to worm it’s all about money.
    Stan Thayer

    Reply
  • Barbara
    Posted September 17, 2017 5:24 pm 0Likes

    For general information
    UN Environment
    Climate Initiatives Platform
    Browse initiatives
    A whole list of organizations affiliated with UN Environment.
    Includes Clinton Climate Initiative.
    Click on any of the organizations for more information on the organization and links.
    http://climateinitiativeplatform.org/index.php/Browse_initiatives

    Reply
  • Notinduttondunwich
    Posted September 20, 2017 5:12 pm 0Likes

    https://globalnews.ca/news/3759469/ontario-minister-court-endangered-species/
    Hmmmmm this is very iteresting!!

    Reply

Add Comment

Facebook-f Twitter Envelope

© Copyright 2022 | WCO | Wind Concerns Ontario

to top