Fairhaven’s Special Election for Board of Health Today
In her recent letter to South Coast Today, Ann DeNardis describes the steps that led from last April’s discredited election result in the Board of Health race. She reminds voters:
Residents of Fairhaven, please vote on September 9, 2013. The last election clearly shows that every vote counts. It is your right and your responsibility.
The current race is decided today between candidates BOH Chairman Peter DeTerra and Registered Nurse John Wethington. The atmosphere is thick with contentious public exchanges outlined by Ariel Wittenberg in “Debate between rival turbine groups in Fairhaven heats up on Facebook.”
Press Release: Fix “Big Wind’s” Problems before Creating More
This press release was issued on September 6, 2013, announcing a letter addressed to the New England governors and Eastern Canadian premiers:
Communities to Governors and Premiers: Fix Wind’s Problems Before Creating More
Urged to stop supporting harmful projects, start protecting people and fixing the problems
Contacts:
- Virginia Irvine (MA) 413-245-3179
- Joyce Hemingston (CT) 860-379-6425
- Annette Smith (VT) 802-446-2094
- Christopher O’Neil (ME) 207-490-3842
- Lori Lerner (NH) 603-744-2300
Hundreds of individuals, victims and groups sent a letter today to the Northeast region’s governor and premiers asking for an end to utility-scale wind development until those projects’ impacts have been addressed.
The letter comes as the officials gather this weekend in La Malbaie for the 37th Annual Conference of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers.
“We are asking them to take clear, compelling, and compassionate steps to solve the problems they have created by supporting the deployment of ‘big wind’ in our region,” said Windwise Massachusetts president Virginia Irvine. “These projects are happening in no small part because of the legislative requirements and generous subsidies for developers pushed by Governors and supported by elected officials. Those officials need to take responsibility for what has happened to individuals and communities as a result.”
The letter highlights the many impacts of utility-scale wind projects, including stresses to the grid, the increased need for expensive transmission lines, public health issues, habitat disruption, negative impacts on tourism, increasing electricity costs, and leading to more greenhouse gas emissions.
“According to ISO New England, it will cost between $11 and $15 billion to build the transmission infrastructure needed to support the Governors’ and Premiers’ goals. Who will pay for that? Where will it go? What communities will be forced to pay the price? They need to answer those questions before they push more projects,” said Chris O’Neil, Public Affairs Director for Friends of Maine’s Mountains. “We hope they will start that discussion this weekend.”
“Wind energy is the least effective renewable energy option both economically and environmentally,” according to Lori Lerner, president of New Hampshire Wind Watch. “We oppose the continued destruction of our state’s most precious natural resources at the hands of industrial wind developers.”
Signers to the letter include physicians, Ph.D.s, a state poet laureate, victims of already-built big wind turbines, neighbors of areas threatened by big wind projects, groups grappling with wind energy development, and individuals from throughout New England.
The noise and human health concerns raised by residents living near the Falmouth Massachusetts wind turbines are not isolated cases. Luann Therrien is a neighbor to the Sheffield VT wind project whose family (including two young children) has been suffering health problems for more than a year. “The developers lied about the noise from these giant machines, and the health impacts they create,” she said. “Headaches, nausea, sleep disruption – it’s happening right now to our family and too many others. Lives are being ruined, homes and futures are being destroyed. This has to stop. At conferences like the one this weekend, protecting public health has to be on the agenda.”
The letter calls on the region’s governments to increase their coordination and share resources to better respond to the issues created by wind development. It asks officials to, “Revise or withdraw your plans that support the expansion of wind and a wind build out in rural areas to support the urban areas. Start evaluating and fixing the problems that have been created by your policies.”
“As the letter states, we need a respectful, honest dialogue about all of these issues,” Annette Smith of Vermonters for a Clean Environment said. “We don’t have ramping plants, so these projects can increase, not decrease, our region’s greenhouse gas emissions. Why aren’t we talking about that? People are as we speak getting sick and being forced to abandon their homes. Let’s have a conversation that addresses what is happening now that so much big wind has been developed in our region. Until these problems are resolved, it would be irresponsible for the Conference to continue to advocate for even more utility-scale wind projects in our region,” she concluded.
#####
Selected comments from letter signers: Read more…
WNTAG Discussion on Video
The Wind turbine Noise Technical Advisory Group’s second public meeting on August 15, 2013 considered details of how to capture and interpret wind turbine noise emissions and how to regulate them. Much of the panel’s discussion revolved around measuring the sound levels and the amplitude modulation. In these clips, acousticians, engineers and policy makers bring their points of view to the issues. Consensus Building Institute (CBI) staff members Stacie Smith and Patrick Field act as moderators. (To read panel members’ profiles, click here).
Editor’s Note: This was the first project for this videographer and participants did not use microphones, so image and sound quality are uneven at times. During the early part of the meeting, an unrelated demonstration was in progress outside the building.
| Speaker order: Robert O’Neal, Martin Suuberg (Mass DEP), Claude Cote, Patrick Field | |
| Speaker order: Steve Ambrose, Albert Bangert, Martin Suuberg, Todd Drummey, Chris Menge, Steve Ambrose | |
| Speaker order: Stacie Smith, Michael Bahtiarian | |
| Speaker order: Steve Ambrose, Sheryl Grace (by telephone) Todd Drummey, Stacie Smith, Michael Bahtiarian | |
| Noise Regulation | |
| Public comments (limited to under 3 minutes) speaker order: David Dardi, Lindsey Deane, Lauren Wells, Andy Wells, Joe Hackler, Virginia Irvine, Stacie Smith, Martin Suuberg, Michael Bahtiarian, Patrick Field |
The WNTAG was commissioned by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. The group’s work is to review MassDEP noise guidelines. The group’s monthly meeting schedule, and materials for each meeting, are hosted on the Consensus Building Institute’s pages. The summary of the first public meeting in July has been posted.
Fairhaven Wind Neighbors in “Too Close”
The 45-minute documentary produced by Windwise Fairhaven is out! Go to their website and click on the green banner at the top of the page. Or view it here: http://vimeopro.com/user8792371/windwise.
About the film:
“TOO Close, Stories from Those Who Live in the Shadows” introduces you to those families who are sentenced to living life with the noise, flicker and adverse health effects of the Fairhaven Wind project. This is a powerful documentary that should be viewed by those who feel a calling to support their neighbors and those who have concerns about a “Wind Friendly” Board of Health opening Fairhaven’s doors to increased wind development. Louise Barteau took to the neighborhoods and spends time with those who have been directly impacted. You’ll hear the touching stories of these families in their own words. If you stand with us in helping, please share this page and show your support and compassion.
Evaluating Hoosac Noise
The Hoosac Wind Sound Monitoring Report identified sound but failed in its task to measure noise. This is the assessment of a careful reader who reviewed the report presented to MassDEP. In his analysis, Chris Kapsambelis found that in only one of the testing events were the conditions appropriate for “worst case” sampling. He explains his findings and notes the missing factors that would have made the testing relevant to people who hear the noise from the massive project impacting Florida and Monroe in the Berkshires.
Boston Globe Letter: Winds of concern for turbines’ neighbors
The Boston Globe‘s business section on August 11 captured one of the ironies of wind development–people who are life-long environmentalists driven to distraction or driven from their homes when huge turbines move into the neighborhood. Erin Ailworth’s piece, Environmental Divide, described various views of the Hoosac Project in the Berkshires. Matthew Cavanaugh’s excellent photograph (right) of a car negotiating the road between several turbines gives some perspective on the scale of the turbines.
Virginia Irvine’s response (8/18/13) appears in the Globe’s letters:
ERIN AILWORTH’S story in last Sunday’s Globe (“Environmental divide,” Money & Careers) regarding the concerns that many have about poorly sited industrial wind turbines clearly presented both sides of this important debate. I want to emphasize the serious health and economic issues faced by those living near the turbines. The fact that there have been many hundreds of complaints to town health officials in communities where there are wind turbines certainly indicates that the problem is much larger than some would like to admit.
There are many other good reasons why 48 proposed wind turbine projects in the state have not been approved. Real estate prices plummet, and the costs of repairing turbines that break down are enormous. Just ask the folks who live in Princeton what they think of the cost-benefit ratio of wind turbines. Their turbine repairs have made their electric rates among the highest in the Commonwealth.
The goal to achieve increased renewable energy sources is admirable. But to blindly support turbines in residential areas without first understanding the health, economic, and environmental consequences is poor government policy.
Virginia Irvine
Brimfield
The writer is president of the board of directors of Wind Wise Massachusetts.
Do Wind Turbine Operators “Influence” Noise Testing
When Louise Barteau noted in February 2013 that the production numbers were lower than expected in Fairhaven during testing in October 2012, she brought it to the attention of the MassDEP, which ordered a new round of testing.
As Chris Kapsambelis reviewed the report from the Hoosac Project, he noticed a similar decline in the production numbers.
In contrast, when Kingston residents paid a consultant to test noise from the three “No Fossil Fuel” turbines, the testing was done without the knowledge of the project owners, so there was no opportunity for them to manipulate the results.
The concerns that numerous individuals addressed in their May letter to the MassDEP are justified, with the evidence of these two instances. The letter asks for “independent monitors during data gathering sessions,” and “determin[ing] the actual production status of the turbine(s) during testing. Some of the testing should be performed unannounced to the turbine operators.”
Yet another case of helping the results to fall on the side of the developers emerged recently in Sheffield VT, where a First Wind project is adversely impacting a family with young children.
According the John Dillon, reporting on August 1, 2013 for Vermont Public Radio, the testing showed a drop-off in production in the middle of a 3-day test. When Dillon asked the lead attorney for the Vermont Department of Public Service, Geoff Commons, about their $20,000 study, he said the results were not definitive.
He said the consultant couldn’t distinguish between the background noise of the wind itself and the turbine sound. And it was difficult to schedule the monitoring when the wind direction makes the sound worse at the Therriens’ place. Finally, there’s the fact the developer knew the testing was taking place. Commons said that wasn’t part of the plan. He said he doesn’t know if First Wind dialed back the turbines to reduce the sound.
“The possibility certainly does concern me, absolutely. I should say it concerns the department, that that could happen. And going forward we are going to try to control for that in any future testing,” he said.
Dr. Wayne Klug Evaluates Report of 2012 Wind Symposium
“Revealing Results on Wind” in the Greenfield Recorder (7/31/13 ) was Professor Wayne Klug’s analysis of the report issued by the Macalester Institute on the “Western Massachusetts Wind Energy Symposium” workshop held July 26, 2012. It was part of a series, Wind Energy – Visual Impacts and Public Perceptions, funded by a National Science Foundation grant.
Although the symposium was held last summer, polling results were released only this year. Curiously, the event itself received considerable press attention, but the findings did not. I offer this column as a partial remedy.
The most noteworthy findings concerned “best practices” where 96 percent supported local control over siting of industrial-scale wind projects (those supplying the grid), and 63 percent supported an “outright ban” in their own towns — or anywhere in the region. Surprisingly, the same number agreed that approval of such projects should require the unanimous consent of all landowners within a 3-mile radius.
Hoosac turbines viewed from Tilda Hill Rd in Florida MA. Photo credit: Virginia Irvine
“The event was held to measure public opinion in the hilltowns of western Massachusetts on the question of industrial-scale wind energy,” according to Klug, who participated as one of 24 randomly-selected residents from Berkshire and Franklin counties.
The day-long symposium at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts in North Adams was organized by researchers from Macalester College and conducted by staff from the Consensus Building Institute in Cambridge. The project focused on visual aesthetics. The Macalester website shows the other workshops in the series–Laramie WY, “Wind Energy and Scenic Considerations in Wyoming” (6/17/09); Manistee MI, “Michigan Wind Energy Landscape Symposium” (7/6/11); and Moorhead, MN, “Minnesota Wind Energy Landscape Symposium” (11/10/11).
(A member of the Sierra Club and an environmental activist for 25 years, Dr. Wayne Klug is professor of psychology at Berkshire Community College in Pittsfield, where he co-created the school’s recycling program and serves as faculty advisor to MassPIRG.)
Troublemaking and Truth-telling are Righteous Roles
South Coast Today has been giving local residents a say in the opinion section, “Your View.” Louise Barteau mulled over why it seems that “Asking questions makes you the troublemaker” (7/24/13). Fairhavenites just wanted to know
We have asked how many homes are located within 3,000 feet of these turbines.
…
We have asked why the DEP refuses to enforce its own noise regulations, despite their promise that the turbines would be shut down if they were found to be out of compliance.
…
Lately some of us have been asking another question — what has it been like for you to live next door to the turbines?We have been told over and over again that we are the only ones who have asked that question. Are we really the only ones who care?
Henry Ferrera, also from Fairhaven, noted that “Compromise has more than one meaning” (7/25/13).
The boss of Palmer Capital and Fairhaven Wind, Gordon Deane, and his partners Sumul Shah and Jim Sweeney want a compromise. They have a compromise, shutting the turbines down from only 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. The neighbors get 12 hours of peace, and noise the other 12. It sounds like the dealer who’s allowed to keep half the pot after being caught playing with a stacked deck — and then asking for a bigger split.
In both editorials, the authors point to the stacked deck where the wind developers put their critics on the defensive. But these critics make articulate and persuasive arguments. Read their full commentaries…
It’s All About the Siting
While Governor Patrick touts solar goals met under green communities initiatives, the wind build-up is lagging. The solar gains are impressive and that’s because they are on a reasonable scale–relatively affordable, with incentives for businesses and homeowners in some locations, and easy to hook up to the utility grid. The photo-op on July 25, 2013 at Massachusetts Maritime Academy was reported in the Cape Cod Times (“Governor calls green energy a success” by Patrick Cassidy).
Wind, on the other hand, requires massive capital in both investment and equipment. Wind turbines have also demanded forest road-building for the Hoosac Project, massive foundations across the state, and need ample distance from residents so as not to threaten health and well-being from noise and inaudible vibrations.
That’s why Lilli-Ann Green expressed her concern with the premise that more wind energy is a benefit.
The Green Communities Act calls for the “as-of-right siting” for alternative energy projects, Wellfleet resident Lilli-Ann Green of the group Wind Wise Massachusetts said in a telephone interview later Wednesday. “As-of-right siting” means a project does not require a special permit, variance, amendment or waiver.
“The Green Communities Act has already led to wind turbine projects in places like Falmouth, Fairhaven and Scituate where the normal processes that give abutters rights were not carried out and now people are sick because they live too close to wind turbines,” she said.
It’s really a shame that while “The state’s current solar capacity is enough to power 42,000 homes or reduce emissions equal to taking 29,000 cars off the road, Patrick said,” the transportation systems have no incentives to take another 29,000 cars off the road–which would really help green Massachusetts communities. Reducing auto pollution would have much more effect than erecting another set of wind turbine towers.
Wind Wise ~ Massachusetts 