Massachusetts legislators are again pushing wind through bills that eliminate and erode obstacles, public and environmental laws that protect us, to gain unlimited development and profit potential for gov picked wind turbines. There will be no public debate.
The State leans on the Wind Noise Impact Study findings of 2012 This study was a review of literature by the state appointed body of experts and advocates of wind. The state refused to provide a seat on the noise panel to victims of Falmouth’s wind turbines who asked for this. The state refused invitations by victims to visit theirr homes near wind turbine sites where excessive noise harmed their health.
Discussiion of wind turbine noise continues to divide turbine invaded towns. Neighbor against neighbor, the fight continues that the wind turbines and their promoters have started.
Falmouth’s debt for 2 wind turbines could exceed $25 miliion. Hundreds of thousands more are out of pocket expenses incurred by victims funding lawyers to win a “nuisance” determination by the courts. Damages are now sought generating more revenue for lawyers. Citizens from 21 communities have bombarded the state with health complaints.
This scenario plays out town by town, state by state and it’s a world-wide problem. The remedy is inconvenient to the truth. Eliminating wind turbines from the energy mix will eliminate the graft and greed, crony capitlsists and organized criminals attracted by public subsidies and “legit” businesses through which to launder their illicit gains. They’ll be gone with the wind if we eliminate the graft and the junk science that keeps the $ flowing.
As pertains to the 2012 MA Wind Turbine Noise Impact Study evoked to support new wind bills, the evidentiary trail does not indicate a fair, transparent and unbiased review process was conducted, or will be conducted. The results of the 2012 study arrived before the panel assembled. No harm was the prediction of then MA energy chief Richard Sullivan, who must have had a crystal ball, or an agenda undermined by Best Science.
March 8, 2012
Mr. Richard Sullivan, Jr.
Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
State of Massachusetts
Mr. Mark Sylvia
Department of Energy Resources
Mr. Kenneth Kimmell
Department of Environmental Protection
RE: public comment wind turbine health impact study commissioned by MA DEP and DPH
Dear Secretary Sullivan, Commissioner Sylvia and Commissioner Kimmell:
The Patrick Administration appears to have predetermined the wind turbine health impact study results that favor industry. The science panel was secretly selected, met in secret and wrote their report in secret and outside of the scope of Open Meeting Law. Apparently, aligned with industry against the public, this administration has failed to take actions to provide reliable energy sources that are commercially reasonable and present minimum risk of harm to public health. Wind energy is neither reliable, nor commercially reasonable, but it causes adverse health impacts and property value depreciation, home abandonment and a host of other untenable and unintended consequences.
The DEP and DPH accepted on behalf of their selected science panel Peer-reviewed articles, reports, presentations, scientific papers, media stories, government legislation and proposed legislation, government reports, and other documents provided by Windwise MA to the DEP, along with evidence from sources and experts around the world, that shows health complaints commence with wind turbine operation.
The DEP DPH commissioned study, however, concludes this evidence does not exist. Close observers recognize that MA Energy and Environment Secretary Richard Sullivan foretold the DEP DPH science panel study conclusion in September 2011, when it was initiated.
Cape Cod Times 9/16/11:
“While the panel's work will be valuable in the creation of setbacks and other standards for wind energy projects, the Patrick administration does not believe at this point that there are major health affects from turbines, Sullivan said.
The intent of the study, it appears, is to neutralize the growing opposition and expanding public awareness of health complaints associated with wind turbines.
During the fall of 2011, I met with the DEP and DPH and wind turbine victims from Massachusetts on the issue of “all these calls”, coming into DPH about wind turbine noise and health complaints. The DEP and DPH refused to favorably consider victims’ repeated requests to participate on the panel and in the study. The DEP DPH study excluded first hand witness accounts and direct evidence of adverse health impacts by wind turbines, by excluding wind turbine abutters with health problems that they attribute to wind turbine operation.
What model of wind turbine health impact study excludes direct evidence of adverse health impacts, while rejecting repeated requests made by victims to conduct site visits?
Look no further than your own Department of Environmental Protection for the compelling evidence that wind turbines are harmful to the public health. DEP Advisor UPC First Wind CEO and President Paul Gaynor is an expert on wind turbine noise and health complaints.
The irony is that First Wind subsidiaries build wind projects that fail to produce energy, yet developers continue to collect public subsidies and yet he serves as green policy Advisor.
It’s a travesty that Governor Deval Patrick has appointed UPC First Wind as Advisor on green policies, when DAs from eight counties were bombarded with complaints against First Wind.
July 15, 2008:
"We've had a number of complaints from counties all over the state, from Franklin all the way over to Erie," said John Milgrim, spokesman for Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.”
“Franklin County District Attorney Derek Champagne was among "DAs from eight counties, public officials and citizens" who bombarded Albany with complaints about Noble and Massachusetts-based First Wind, formerly known as UPC Wind, he said"
Paul Gaynor is New England’s largest wind developer. Mr. Gaynor is demonstrably knowledgeable of noise and health problems associated with wind turbines UPC First Wind sells, and has installed, from Italy to New England, from New York to Hawaii.
Either DEP green policy Advisor Paul Gaynor has failed to inform the DEP about noise and health complaints regarding HIS wind turbines, or the DEP has failed to inform the public that noise and health complaints are generated by wind turbines operated by DEP’s Advisor. The public, in either case, is willfully or by malfeasance and negligence, denied the truth, if it is considered reasonable to conclude that First Wind CEO and President has since 2008 known that his wind turbines generate health complaints and he failed to disclose this to the DEP as DEP Advisor.
First Wind Boston-based CEO and President Paul Gaynor is Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick’s appointed Co-chair of “The Climate Protection Advisory Committee” under the Global Warming Solutions Act. First Wind Paul Gaynor is also co-chair of the Mass Department of Environmental Protection Advisory Committee “Low Carbon Energy Supply Subcommittee.”
As Advisor to DEP on green policy, Paul Gaynor should be compelled to disclose noise and health complaints associated with his wind projects to the DEP and DPH. In turn, the DEP and DPH must be compelled, by the Attorney General if necessary, to disclose to the public that wind turbines deployed by UPC First Wind have drawn health and noise complaints and caused physical illnesses and human suffering.
The DEP and DPH charged with protection of public health and the environment must disclose compelling evidence of harm to humans and their property values by wind turbines operated by DEP’s own green policy Advisor, Paul Gaynor of
UPC First Wind.
Windmills a sound investment?
By Mary Perham
Mon Apr 06, 2009, 12:11 AM EDT
Bath, N.Y. -
Editor’s note | This is the first part of a two-part look at developing concerns over wind farms in parts of Steuben County.
In early January, the blades in the 53-turbine First Wind project in the town of Cohocton began to spin. It was the first project in Steuben County to generate renewable energy and one of five under consideration in the county.
Within weeks, dozens of Cohocton residents went to the town board in neighboring Prattsburgh to warn that the machines were proving to be noisy and harmful.
“Don’t let (the developers) buffalo you,” Cohocton resident Hal Graham told the Prattsburgh Town Board in late February. “You know, I wanted to do something for the environment. And now I can’t sleep at night.”
Photo by Jason Cox | The Leader
A wind turbine is seen from Hal Graham’s window on Lent Hill in Cohocton.
Graham initially supported wind farm development.
Prattsburgh is the site of two wind farms planned by developers First Wind and EcoGen. Other projects have been proposed in the towns of Hartsville and Howard.
Since wind farms in Steuben County were first proposed in 2002, developers have admitted it’s hard to miss seeing the 400-foot-high turbines, but insisted they sound no louder than a refrigerator’s hum.
The projects have been promoted throughout the largely rural county as a quiet, inexpensive and environmentally-friendly way to provide renewable energy.
Environmental studies for Cohocton and Steuben County led to restrictions of the turbines’ sound to a maximum comfort level of 50 decibels. Setbacks were established to assure both noise and other potential dangers such as shadow flicker and flying debris were lessened.
Yet the promised “refrigerator hum” of the turbines was a falsity as residents began to compare the sound to the roar of a jet engine, according to Graham.
The Cohocton residents are among a growing number of people across the nation complaining the noise made by wind turbines is intrusive and disturbing. Medical professionals have compiled studies showing the noise can pose health hazards.
And the wind industry is beginning to take notice.
In Maine, where the state welcomed renewable energy, the Mars Hill project has been widely criticized for being noisy.
According to a March 26, 2008 report by the Daily News in Bangor, Maine, UPC Wind president and CEO Paul Gaynor said the company would do a better job in the future about letting local residents know what to expect from wind farms.
“I know there was an expectation (in Mars Hill) about what these were going to sound like,” Gaynor told the Daily News. “These are big structures and they do make sound.”
Shortly after Gaynor spoke to the Maine newspaper, the firm changed its name to First Wind. It was formerly known as Global Winds Harvest/UPC.
Local officials said they have relied on the best information available and worked to ensure the safety of residents.
Steuben County Industrial Development Agency Exec-utive Director James Sherron said the agency has regulatory standards based on data from the state Department of Environmental Conservation and state Energy Research Development Agency.
The Steuben County IDA has established minimum distances that wind turbines can be to a residence, called a setback. There are also limits on decibel levels.
But Sherron said he has heard reports of 110 decibels in Cohocton -- twice the accepted limit – and added any violations would go through a process of sound studies to decide the best way to solve the issue.
“We have a responsibility with the developers, they have to meet the criteria,” Sherron said. “They could be asked to slow down the turbines, find alternatives. It could mean the unit would be removed.”
Sherron said another factor in the noise may be the model of machine used in Cohocton.
While SCIDA initially reviewed 1.5 megawatt turbines, the five wind farm developers looking to do business in the county indicated they would be installing 2.3 megawatt turbines. The larger turbines were approved because SCIDA’s consultants said there was no significant difference in their impact, Sherron said.
But all models under consideration are capable of exceeding 100 decibels at a maximum speed of 30 feet per second, according to a report to SCIDA by developer EverPower.
Typically, the blade rotation is reduced to lower speeds.
Yet some sound experts charge the current “acceptable” range of 45-50 decibels is excessive, and twice as loud as some background rural noise recorded at 20-25 decibels.
Acoustical engineer Richard James warned the noise is not only nerve-wracking, but poses health risks now being studied in the U.S. and in Europe, where wind farms have operated for nearly 20 years.
James likened the potential long-term effect of wind farms to the now-notorious region near Buffalo, where officials paved over the toxic waste which later poisoned residents.
“This is like Love Canal,” he said.
April 1, 2009 by Jack Zigenfus
Cohocton, NY permitted First Wind (formerly UPC Wind) to construct two wind energy facilities in the town on private land. Noise complaints started almost immediately after the turbines became operational. Windaction.org has been notified that the below letter was sent by Cohocton's town supervisor to First Wind.
Paul Gaynor as DEP Advisor on "Low Carbon Energy Supply Subcommittee" provides empirical evidence by First Wind's non-disclosure settlement that shows adverse impacts by wind turbines to property owners is confirmed. First Wind "gag order" on their Sheffield settlement has been posted in its entirety, here, with Adobe link to the actual document, names redacted:
To eliminate obstacles for renewable energy developers, noise problems by wind turbines, was the clear objective of this wind turbine health impact study conducted by industry biased panelists, including Dora Mills.
Evidence of strong bias in favor of wind energy, and admitted concern about noise by turbines, is highlighted by a circa 2010 FOIA that revealed Dora Mills of the Patrick Administration science panel that produced the Wind Impact Study worked with the DEP in ME to dismiss health complaints regarding wind turbines. Massachusetts would then be the second state in which Dora Mills worked with the DEP to dismiss health concerns by wind turbines.
Spruce Mtn Appeal (2010 Maine) for specifics on Mill's involvement- see pp. 30-37 of this doc for the most incriminating evidence of industry bias:
Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary provided in comments to DEP/DPH for this panel’s consumption, the panel was tone deaf to serious health complaints that are repeatedly made by citizens living near wind turbines around the world, with many sold by First Wind.
The victims of wind energy you imply lie or simply do not exist are further victimized by this administration’s apathy, indifference, cruelty and malfeasance. After receiving “all these calls” (DPH) from victims of wind energy; and after your receipt of hundreds of letters, reports, articles and studies on the topic of adverse health impacts by wind turbines, I think it is transparently and embarrassingly shameful for this administration to deny the existence of evidence sufficient to prompt a public safety moratorium on wind turbines by the State.
Alas, public interest is only served by disinterested Public Officials. And unfortunately, Best Science conflicts with this administration’s green agenda of crony capitalism and corporate welfare.
As cited in the US House of Representatives Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan study, ‘Promise of Green Jobs’, “The Costly Consequences of Crony Capitalism” of 11/21/11, subject, PATRICK ADMINISTRATION APPOINTED GREEN POLICY ADVISOR PAUL GAYNOR FIRST WIND--
“First Wind Holdings, received a $117 million loan guarantee in March of 2010. First Wind withdrew its initial public offering in October of 2010, due to a lack of investor demand. According to the Boston Globe, investors shied away from the company because “First Wind owes more than $500 million, loses money on a steady basis, and reports a negative cash flow.”
With a modicum of due diligence on the part of the DEP, DPH and Patrick Administration, the physical suffering of MA residents ongoing by wind turbines could have been averted. This harm to MA residents duplicates events that have caused physical suffering and property value loss by ME residents who have filed suit against First Wind—Patrick Administration and DEP green policy Advisor:
. August 12, 2009 • Filings, Health, Human rights, Maine, Noise, Property values
Mars Hill residents’ suit against First Wind et al.
When all of the turbines became operational for the first time in late March 2007, it became immediately obvious to the Plaintiffs that the noise from the turbines was invasive and caused them loss of enjoyment of life, loss of peace and quiet, loss of their full use of their home and land. Some Plaintiffs required medical treatment and counseling. Many have, and continue to, lose sleep, suffer headaches, suffer considerable stress, and other physical and emotional ailments.
14. The real estate values of the Plaintiffs’ homes have been greatly reduced, as is supported by an expert’s opinion, of their property values before and after operation of the turbines.
Continue reading and download suit:
DEP ADVISOR PAUL GAYNOR OF FIRST WIND IS ALSO THE HAWAII WIND DEVELOPER tied to the Largest-ever asset seizure by anti-Mafia police and wind fraud.
Subject: First Wind:
Monday, March 28, 2011
Hawaii Wind Developer tied to Largest-ever asset seizure by anti-Mafia police
By Andrew Walden :: 4455 Views :: Maui Politics, Maui News, Oahu News, Oahu Politics
Subject: First Wind:
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Maine PUC Rejects Giant Wind Farm Because of “Risk to Ratepayers”
By Selected News Articles :: 304 Views :: National News, National Politics
Subject: First Wind:
Tuesday, December 06, 2011
Confidential Memo: Wind Turbine Model Installed at Kahuku has Structural Problems
Check out "Wind Farm Doing Nothing!" on Fix Oahu Now! Panos Prevedouros for Mayor of Honolulu
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Video: Kahuku Wind turbines don’t even turn on windy day
By Video :: 154 Views :: Oahu News, Oahu Politics, Hawaii State News, Hawaii State Politics
http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/main/DesktopModules/DnnForge - NewsArticles/Print.aspx?tabid=56&tabmoduleid=74&articleId=4239&moduleId=380&PortalID=0
Got Wind? YES. Got Power? NO
by Panos Prevedouros PhD
(CLICK LINK TO VIDEO)
The bottom line is that both HECO and government got it wrong. Even when wind is present, the turbines are doing nothing.
[review video and continue reading by link above]
The wind turbine health impact study commissioned by the state is indefensible on moral grounds. The study allows the continuation of wind turbine victims’ suffering and promotes an increase in the population of wind turbine victims.
The interests of citizens’ entitled to protection of their health, private property rights and undiminished property values, would best be served by declaration of an immediate moratorium on wind turbine installations by the State and a shut down of those in operation.
The State should not endorse, or fund with public dollars, industry that threatens citizens’ basic rights to reasonable assurance of health and safety, reliable and affordable energy.
I request that my comments be published online by MA DEP and DPH as offered in response to the Wind Turbine Health Impact Study commissioned by MA DEP and DPH.