Wind company ‘gag’ orders hide the truth

In a recent article by the Anderson County Review, the conclusion on the non-disclosure clauses or “gag” clauses in wind turbine leases (property owners lease their land to wind power developers for terms of 20 years and more) was that the wind power corporations want silence from the leaseholders because, as the writer says, “If you control the smoke, there is no evidence of a fire.”
Leaseholders or “lessors” as they are called in the contracts, are prevented from revealing or discussing anything to do with the turbine operations on their land for the term of the lease, and that includes noise, flashing lights, the results of any noise testing — everything.
In Ontario, this came up a few years ago over the question of the disturbed water wells in North Kent. The landowners with turbines were probably affected too if vibrations from construction and operation was causing sediment to enter and clog wells, but they can’t say anything about it. The new leader of Water Wells First said last week she “knows there are more wells out there” beyond the 20 or so that are so badly affected they cannot be used.
The question arose, is this an obstacle to public health surveillance? The answer was that individual citizens would have to spend money taking the multi-billion-dollar wind corporations to court to establish that.
Here is the Anderson County Review article:

The wind may blow free, but the use of gag orders in lease agreements and easements that force property owners to keep their mouths shut about the realities they endure as sites for those giant wind turbines makes information flow anything but.

That’s critical in this fat cat, tax-credit fueled industry which, more and more, depends on secrecy as much as it does a steady breeze. Wind farm developers like to point to thousands of lease holders at projects across the country and how few complaints they have about their gigantic neighbors, but they never mention the source of all that satisfaction – prosecution and financial ruination due to gag clauses in those signed leases and easement agreements. Indeed, where you can keep control of the smoke, there’s no evidence of a fire.
Keeping tight control of information and particularly criticism from eye-witnesses is allowing wind companies like those moving against targets in Linn and Neosho counties and other rural communities in Kansas to go about their business without interference from public regulatory authorities and other outsiders who want to chronicle precisely how much damage is being done by wind turbines. Silenced victims suffer for their property, their environment and their own health. But the gag orders that bind those lease holders are clear: Speak up, particularly to the media, and not only will your lease payments disappear but we’ll sue you – and we’ll still have a 55-story tall tower on your land which you can’t stop us from operating.
Perhaps the most damning casualty of this secrecy is in the kibosh it has put to extended research on Wind Turbine Syndrome, a health condition identified among many people living near wind turbines and believed to be caused by light flicker from the moving blades, fluctuations in air pressure as those blades move past their base tower and low-frequency noise they produce. In her book “Wind Turbine Syndrome: A report on a natural experiment,” Dr. Nina Pierpont conducted extensive clinical interviews with 10 families living near wind farm turbines both in the U.S. and abroad. The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine-trained pediatrician discovered a striking uniformity of complaints from these families – migraine, motion sickness, vertigo, noise and visual and gastrointestinal sensitivity, and anxiety. Between the time of her interviews and the final publication of the book, nine of the ten families had fled their homes for residences away from wind farms, and a 10th who couldn’t afford to move did extensive renovations to their house in an attempt to defeat the pressure and frequency issues, and had reduced air flow inside the home to the point it was now hard to heat.
A full-on epidemiological study however will probably never be done – one that correlates the common symptoms Pierpont identified and possible causes like setback from a turbine and what aspects of exposure to measure – because the bulk of the study subjects are all gagged.
“Better Plan Wisconsin” is a wind farm opposition organization in the Badger State which got hold of a wind farm lease from a farmer who’d had enough. The story is nearly identical state to state and lease to lease. Landowners who sign leases or easements can’t discuss noise, vibration, shadow flicker or any disruptions the turbines might cause to their properties. The gag orders stop all discussion regarding the terms of the lease, or the construction or operation of the turbines, as well as speaking to reporters or to anyone in the media or issuing statements or press releases without the written permission of the wind company. Then there’s this jewel:
“This section shall survive the termination of expiration of this lease,” meaning the gag order survives forever, even after the lease is terminated. Under the threat of litigation, you are gagged for life.
Still, impoverished county leaders and farmers embrace the promise of lease payments and payments in lieu of taxes (Kansas wind farms are exempt from property taxes, unlike other power plants), ignoring the deafening silence coming from those signed to the lease agreements.
Yes, silence is golden. That’s just how the wind companies want it.
– Dane Hicks is publisher of The Anderson County Review in Garnett, Kan.
What's your reaction?


  • Stan Thayer
    Posted February 3, 2019 5:01 am 0Likes

    Great article on gag orders, thanks!
    Another area of concern, which is distressing to me, is that clear title is lost. A WCO article some time ago mentioned equity loss on neighboring properties. This is true but only a percentage whereas the leased property basically goes to zero and will most likely become a liability to the original owner when the windmill company is sold, declares bankruptcy or simply walks away.
    This morning, February 3rd 2019 -14C, the two Industrial Wind Turbine sites I pass on my way to work, are at Wolfe Island and Amherst Island. At 2am this morning total power output from both was zero, no power out only power in, from the hydro grid, to supply heat, power the clearance lights, operate the controls, brakes, etc., etc..
    Almost 3000 windmills across Ontario that, at times, do not produce enough power to charge my cell phone and when the IWT’S do produce power, we, the Ontario electricity ratepayer must pay some other power authority to take it.
    More IWT’S that need repairs equals more cost to the so called, “middle class”, which equals more money leaving the province.
    The McGuinty-Wynne Liberals are gone but not forgotten!
    Gag on that Kathleen Wynne!
    Stan the power man

    • Wind Concerns Ontario
      Posted February 3, 2019 1:01 pm 0Likes

      You may wish to comment on the news that the Mayor of the City of Ottawa announced that he plans to give former Premier Dalton McGuinty (who is responsible for the Green Energy Act) the “Key to the City”.

  • Sommer
    Posted February 5, 2019 6:19 pm 0Likes

    Are there any other industries in Ontario where gag orders are used to silence people being harmed?

    • Karen
      Posted October 31, 2019 8:21 am 0Likes

      Gag Orders always come into play when the Government is involved. Pretty strange considering they flaunt their “open and transparent” narrative.

      • Wind Concerns Ontario
        Posted October 31, 2019 8:33 am 0Likes

        The non-disclosure clauses or “gag” clauses are in the contracts between the wind power developers and the leaseholders. The government has nothing to do with that. The clauses are very interesting because they list the possible effects of hosting wind turbines, including noise, vibration, strobe effect/shadow flicker, flashing lights, etc. The important question is, as in the case of the disturbed water wells in North Kent, do the non-disclosure clauses interfere with the protection of public health?

        • Karen
          Posted November 1, 2019 7:37 am 0Likes

          I would have to say the non-disclosure clauses do interfere with the protection of public health. First off they are admitting ‘possible side affects’, which the companies then fight and deny to the bitter end (when a claim is made). I guess in the case of the lease-holder, the compensation being offered is just to good to pass up, and they in turn really couldn’t care less about their neighbour, or birds, wells, or anything else. Money talks, and that is all they care about.

  • Richard Mann
    Posted February 6, 2019 10:21 am 0Likes

    Is anyone following PG&E (Pacific Gas and Electric), NYSE:PCG. Seems renewable energy contracts are uncertain.

  • Bernie Cusack
    Posted February 14, 2019 8:32 pm 0Likes

    A despicable state of affairs.

  • hello
    Posted June 17, 2019 9:30 am 0Likes

    go to this wibsit

Add Comment

© Copyright 2022 | WCO | Wind Concerns Ontario

to top