Study says wind turbines meet all established noise limits
From the “Post Construction Noise Survey Report” by Hessler Associates, Inc., Principal Consultant: George F. Hessler Jr.
Report Number 061608-1
The following text is taken from pages 5 and 6 of the 34-page report.
The complete report is public record and available on this PSC website link:
http://psc.wi.gov/apps/erf_share/view/viewdoc.aspx?docid=102715
“The test engineers did not observe any adverse character or tones from the wind turbines at the measurement locations near residences. The author did not witness any often described ‘whoosh-whoosh’ character except when very close (50 ft) from a turbine. The whoosh-whoosh is observed when each blade visually passes the 9:00 o’clock position.
It is clear from the plots that the Blue Sky Green Field wind turbines do not generate significant LFN.” (low frequency noise)
3.0 Conclusions
Based on the presented data and analysis, we conclude that the BSGF wind turbine project meets all established noise limits and design goal for the project. Health effects in the form of sleep interference and low frequency noise level issues are addressed and it is concluded there should not be adverse response caused by these issues. Annoyance to low-level, but audible noise is not predictable and may depend on non-technical factors in addition to measured sound levels.”Report Prepared by:
Hessler and Associates, Inc.
Consultants in Engineering Acoustics
3862 Clifton Manor Place Suite B
Haymarket, VA 20169
http://www.hesslernoise.com
I am an independent acoustical engineer who has studied the communities hosting the Blue Sky Green Fields and Horicon Marsh wind utilities on behalf of local citizens. I have personally taken sound measurements that demonstrate the existence of high sound levels from the wind turbines that Mr. Hessler’s study claims are compatible with the local community’s soundscape. As such, I found evidence of wind turbine sounds on properties adjacent wind turbines sufficient to create high levels of annoyance and sleep disturbance. Both of these conditions can lead to medical pathologies, especially for senior citizens, children under 6, and people with pre-existing medical conditions.
In my opinion, locating wind turbines in communities where the distance from the turbines to the nearest homes is not sufficient results in the creation of new environmental pollution problems while trying to solve our country’s energy problems. Continued efforts by wind developers to force projects into communities without proper attention to noise and other legitimate concerns may ultimately prove to be detrimental to the cause of renewable wind energy. Good corporate stewardship is needed by the wind utility developers during these initial projects to demonstrate that the solution of one environmental problem does not require that we create new environmental problems.
Is it unexpected that a consultant’s report, commissioned by the wind project developer, would put a favorable spin on the noise conditions that the people of these communities must now tolerate on an ongoing basis? If wind projects in Wisconsin were indeed as compatible with rural environments as Mr. Hessler’s report appears to suggest, then why have the complaints from members of these communities increased now that the wind projects are operating? If the projects were as quiet and compatible with rural Wisconsin in operation as the hosting communities were told they would be then why have the complaints not died down?
In my opinion, it is because the rules and procedures set by the State of Wisconsin and adopted by these communities are not sufficiently protective of the people who live on the borders of the projects. Had the initial promise of quiet and compatibility been borne out in the projects that are currently operating then there should be no sustained complaints. Yet, there are many in these communities who do not find that the turbines are ‘quiet’ or that they are compatible.
r2james
December 18, 2008
r2james,
The post-construction study discussed in the original post includes detailed tables and graphs of sound levels.
Could you please post the comparable details from your sound measurements?
Otherwise, we have no way of comparing your findings to the post-construction study and no way to assess your assertions about “high sound levels from the wind turbines.”
The data would be helpful to everyone.
edblume
December 18, 2008
Regarding Mr. Blume’s request for detailed data:
This is not the place to conduct a comparison of results.
The studies that I have done have been for individuals and groups that may at some future time wish to use in hearings or litigation. As such, the details are still confidential.
Should you be interested in the general conclusions of these studies please download and read the document at http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/?p=925
Needless to say, there are people in the subject communities that are not as satisfied with wind turbine noise as Mr. Hessler’s report might imply or they would not have invested their own money in independent studies by experts not working for the wind utility.
r2james
December 18, 2008
Without the data, r2james, your assertions are no more than that — assertions. And they hold no validity, no value.
edblume
December 18, 2008
Mr. Blume, this is a quote from a 5/18/08 article in the tri-county news from one of the farmers living in the Blue Sky Green Field Project.
“Hass said the noises made by the turbines are another concern. He said when he toured a much smaller wind farm near Montfort, there was no noise. He said he was surprised when the Johnsburg area turbines started spinning that there was noise-noise which he said his parents can hear in their bedroom and which he said is upsetting neighbors. “That land can be fixed,” Hass said. “That noise will be here forever.”
If you’ll recall, farmers who host turbines in the Blue Sky Green Field project must agree to a gag order which does not allow them to complain about noise or any other trouble from the turbines unless they want to face a lawsuit.
Some farmers are speaking out anyway.
I’m not sure why it is you refuse to believe there are noise problems with poorly sited turbines. Your assertions are no more than that– assertions. And they hold no validity, no value.
bloomed
December 19, 2008
We would all be better off, bloomed, if r2james and the people who paid him would post the data on r2james’ study.
Let the data do the talking, because “opinions” vary on the whole issue.
For instance, some people don’t have any problem with the sounds of turbines: “Hutchinson and her young family have grown to enjoy the 45 windmills built by Canadian Hydro in this Dufferin County township.
‘We don’t mind them at all. There’s no real noise from what we can tell,’ she says. ‘You basically have to stop walking along the gravel to hear them because your footsteps are louder than they are.’”
Here’s the post of the newspaper story that contains the above quote:
http://renewenergyblog.wordpress.com/2008/09/15/family-enjoys-wind-turbines
If the data support r2james’ opinions, then he and the people who paid him are doing themselves and their neighbors a disservice by not putting the data on the table to back up their claims. If their claims have validity, they’re letting the turbines continue to “upset neighbors” by not producing the data. If their claims are backed by the data, wind farm developers need the data to do exactly what you want on siting.
bloomed, can you produce a document that contains the “gag order?” Mr. Hass must have a copy of the agreement (if his land has a turbine). If the gag order really exists, Hass would be in the middle of a lawsuit. Has he been sued? Without documentation, your assertion and concern for noise have the same weight as those of r2james.
edblume
December 19, 2008
My dear Mr. Bloom,
Are we not speaking specifically of noise issues at the Blue Sky Green Field project?
Why bring up Canadian Hydro?
If you’d like to see a Blue Sky Green Field landowners contract, you’ll be able to find a copy with just a little bit of work on your part. My understanding is that it was Mr. Hass’s elderly parents who signed on with the developers.
But sir, I do understand why you continue to insist that there are no noise issues associated with turbines. I understand your paycheck depends on it.
You’re just doing your job, Mr. Blume. Just following orders.
bloomed
December 19, 2008
bloomed,
Your comments about my motivations are offensive to me as a person. You don’t know me, yet you feel comfortable launching personal attacks about why I do what I do.
It’ easy for you, of course, since you choose to post with a nickname. Be open and honest. List you name, occupation, and anything else that might help us know who you are.
And, please, keep the discussion on the same level that you’d use around the dinner table with your friends and family or in a professional setting.
edblume
December 19, 2008
The Hessler Report is Means Nothing!
This conclusion section says it all. This is no more than the fox watching the hen house. I hope these boys are patting themselves on the back because they have done it again. Once again they have put the health and safety of residents in jeopardy.
3.0 Conclusions
Based on the presented data and analysis, we conclude that the BSGF wind turbine project meets all established noise limits and design goal for the project. Health effects in the form of sleep interference and low frequency noise level issues are addressed and it is concluded there should not be adverse response caused by these issues. Annoyance to low-level, but audible noise is not predictable and may depend on non-technical factors in addition to measured sound levels.”
Who established the noise limits and design goals? Was it the wind developer, the PSC, or Mr. Hessler or a combination of all three? All three had the same goal in mind, site as many turbines as close to homes as possible. If the design limits are 50dB at a residence that is outrageous. Background sound levels in this rural area would be about 25dB at night. If you raise the level to 50dB that is not double it is 5 times as loud and then they have the audacity to say it’s not a problem and they can’t hear it. Well I have a news flash for them, there will be people walking the floor at night in the BSGF project, or going to a motel.
Pay Mr. James or Mr. Kamperman to do the test without being told what to do. Then subject that test and the Hessler test to peer review if you really want to know what is going on in the BSGF project. The Hessler test results alone, paid for by the wind developer are worthless. Mr. Hessler was told what the preconstruction sound tests needed to be to make the post construction tests appear to be in compliance. He gave them exactly what they paid him to provide.
This test report is another classic example of the reckless approach that the PSC has taken to permit wind facilities with no regard for the health and safety of the citizens of Wisconsin.
Change is coming!
kitfox
December 19, 2008
Dear Mr. Bloom,
Please accept my apologies for offending you. I admit I put it badly. But am I wrong in saying you are employed by an organization which is open about its financial ties to the wind industry? Am I wrong about your paid duty as a defender of industrial scale wind turbines?
By the way, no judgement there, at all. We all need a job. But at least provide a bit of transparency in regard your financial obligation and motivation, sir.
True, this may not dinner conversation.
But it may be of great interest to readers of your posts who have already dined.
bloomed
December 19, 2008
Bloomed,
Apology accepted.
Yes, I work for RENEW Wisconsin.
However, I choose to work for RENEW Wisconsin because I personally believe in its mission. I believe that renewable energy will help us reduce our reliance on fossil fuels — an addiction that drives the U.S. to war and generates carbon dioxide pollution that’s changing our climate.
I could be selling insurance or shuffling papers in some large corporation, but I wouldn’t believe in what I’d be doing.
My beliefs are a more powerful motivation than a paycheck.
edblume
December 20, 2008
Mr. Blume,
You are good to be this transparent about your employer and let us know that wind developers do pay you. Not directly of course. Via Renew, to be sure.
And wind developers are certainly not the only corporations (limited or otherwhise) contributing to your paycheck for your services. No need to list them!
Again, no fault here! A job is job, and you’ve made it clear your promotion of claims made by wind developers — such as noise from industrial turbines isn’t never a problem for homes 1000 feet away, and shadow flicker is rare and only lasts a few minutes– and the main reason people don’t want turbines 350 steps from their doors is because they don’t like the way turbines look— I understand your that your promotion of these claims isn’t a conflict for you because you yourself, believe them.
Is this correct?
And for a breath of fresh air, what other renewable energy options for our fine state look good to you, sir?
bloomed
December 20, 2008
You still miss the point, bloomed.
A few renewable energy advocates founded RENEW 17 years ago. The first “executive director” volunteered his time during his lunch hour, and the RENEW mission was written at that time, long before a single penny was contributed to RENEW by anyone. And the mission has not changed in those 17 years.
To use your logic (forgive me if I assume too much), a minister preaches about religion only because a church pays him (or her). In your logic, you’d say the preacher believes his or her preaching because of the money. Now, none of us believes that.
But to move on to other forms of renewable energy, you can take a few minutes to look at this blog and RENEW’s Web site. You’ll see that RENEW promotes biomass (wood, switchgrass, and other organic matter) for generation of heat and electricity; solar installations for electricity and hot water; biodigesters for generation of electricity from manure; and methane gas captured from landfills for generation of electricity.
To take this discussion back to money, not a single landfill developer contributes a single penny to RENEW, but we still promote capture of landfill gas and I still believe it’s a worthwhile way to respond to our addiction to fossil fuels.
And back to the personal, I had a contractor blow additional insulation into my home’s attic after conducting a “blower door” test and sealing leaks in the residence. I installed compact fluorescent and LED bulbs in my house. And no one paid me to make any of those improvements.
I ride my bike to work year around (and did before I worked for RENEW Wisconsin), but take the bus only when the streets are snow-packed and slippery, like now. Why? They’re important to reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and cutting climate-changing pollution.
I hope that you, too, have better insulated your residence, installed energy-saving light bulbs, ride a bike as often as possible, or even have solar panels to provide hot water and electricity where you live. Then you’d be making significant contributions to energy security and clean air.
edblume
December 20, 2008