Public Comment Period Open on Panel Report
The Massachusetts DEP is accepting comments on the Wind Science Panel Report until March 19, 2012.
They will get an earful from people across the state at the 3 open meetings to be held in February: on the 14th in Boston, the 16th in Bourne and the 28th in Lee.
- Tuesday February 14, 2012 from 10 AM to 1 PM at the Gardner Auditorium in the Statehouse, 24 Beacon Street, Boston.
- Thursday February 16, 2012 from 5:00 to 8:00 PM at the Beth Bourne Auditorium, Bourne High School, 75 Waterhouse Road, Bourne.
- Tuesday February 28, 2012 from 5:00 to 8:00 PM at the Lee Middle and High School Auditorium, 300 Greylock Street, Lee. (Snow date: February 29, 2012)
The public comment period on the report continues until Monday, March 19 at 5p.m.
Electronic comments can be submitted to: WindTurbineDocket.MassDEP@MassMail.State.MA.US
Written comments can be submitted to:
MassDEP Wind Turbine Docket One Winter Street Fourth Floor Boston, MA 02108Study Findings Whitewash Health Impacts
The wind science panel has released its findings on the MassDEP website where a brief summary precedes a link to the study itself. As expected, the report denies the existence of Wind Turbine Syndrome, and also disputes the recent findings in the McPherson low frequency noise study. The panel does call for further research. But rather than delay siting until studies are done, it calls for education, incentives, setback guidelines and compensation. “The Panel suggests that the public be engaged through such strategies as education, incentives for community-owned wind developments, compensations to those experiencing documented loss of property values, comprehensive setback guidelines, and public education related to renewable energy” (p. ES-13).
“This whitewash is no surprise” was the response of WWMA steering committee member Eleanor Tillinghast. She went on to say, “We knew from the beginning that DEP’s report would be politically motivated with a predetermined outcome.”
“This panel was not independent, its work was not conducted in public or with any ongoing involvement by the public. Everything was done in secret, so who can take this report seriously?” asked Barry C. Cosgrove, also of Windwise ~ Massachusetts.
WWMA again calls for an epidemiological study of those people living near turbines where adverse health effects are being felt.
Financial markets register Vestas decline
The Wall Street Journal is taking notice of the declining wind turbine industry where “wind companies … have seen the price of turbines fall by 20% over four years” because of many factors, including Chinese competition. Vestas, the Danish manufacturer of turbines like those in Falmouth, has been blown off course according to Andrew Peaple. Shaking up management and laying off 10% of its workforce is Vestas’ response to the decline of governments’ incentives for industrial wind. “Vestas’s shares fell 7% this week and have now lost 90% of their value since mid-2008.”
Vestas was in the news in December when a letter from CEO Ditlev Engel became public. He was arguing against new noise regulations proposed for Denmark. The effect on demand for his product would be low, he said, but he continued,
By means of its high wind penetration, 24% in 2010 – still a world record – Denmark has a role as a forerunner country and a full scale laboratory for conversion to renewable energy.
This means that other countries often look to Denmark when adjusting their legislation regarding wind energy. We are therefore concerned – justifiably so as history shows – that the proposed Danish regulations for low frequency noise from wind turbines will spread to a large number of other markets with much higher commercial impact for Vestas and consequently for employment in the business.
Between the growing concern about health effects from turbine audible and sub-audible noise and the outcry against excessively generous subsidies for turbine development, more news of decline in industrial wind may be in the offing.
Duxbury Selectmen Heed Citizen Message
“After the local opposition group Duxbury Wind Wise made its presentation, Duxbury’s selectmen voted to recommend that the town’s Alternative Energy Committee give up a plan to seek local funding to continue its study of the North Hill site.” This is the crux of a January 5, 2012 article by Boston Globe correspondent Robert Knox.
But instead of leading with this actual news, Knox sells his article with the false assertions of pro-wind advocates. Knox quotes the cochairman of Sustainable Duxbury and the chairman of the Sustainable Energy Committee accusing that there are outside resources being used to influence the town.
It is somewhat understandable that this reporter might have mixed up Duxbury Wind Wise with Wind Wise ~ Massachusetts. WWMA is a statewide alliance, not an organization. Before its name was chosen in May 2011 there was already a Windwise Cape Cod and Fairhaven. Since then Duxbury adopted a variation of the wind wise phrase. Other affiliates were more direct, as with No Brimfield Wind or more circumspect, as in the case of Preserve Lenox Mountain. Each group addresses its own concerns in the way it finds best for its community, and when necessary raises funds for lawn signs, bumper stickers, billboards, lawyers, consultants, and speakers.
These groups have at least one thing in common. They pool information from experts, from people living with turbines, and from investigating the project on their doorstep.
When it comes to industrial wind, the facts speak for themselves. No expensive lobbying campaign required.
2011 Year in Review
Wind Wise ~ Massachusetts, a fledgling alliance that joins together grassroots groups fighting industrial wind proposals around the state, had an eventful 2011.
There were significant high points, in particular the tabling of the siting act known as WESRA. This threat to municipal control was averted when state Senate President Therese Murray changed her view and Senator Ben Downing, the chair of the legislative committee where WESRA was heard, sent the bill to study soon after.
These reversals were a direct result of citizen involvement. Activism convinced boards to take actions that reduce the chance of siting wind turbines near people. The Cape Cod Commission adopted setbacks and called for noise study before siting. The Central MA town of Charlton adopted setbacks and height restrictions. The combination of economic realities and resident opposition led Dartmouth to end its project, Brewster to opt for solar over wind, and First Wind to withdraw its proposal for Brimfield.
The documentary Windfall filled halls across the state and added visual evidence to the many factors that dispute the environmental and economic claims for industrial turbines.
There were also low points, with people in Falmouth suffering from two existing turbines and anticipating a third. Their plight is revealed in the interview series conducted by Dr. Nina Pierpont, who describes symptoms like theirs as “wind turbine syndrome.” The Department of Environmental Protection issued one set of noise regulations that ignore sub-audible sound and another that would allow turbines to be sited next to drinking water sources. Together with the Department of Public Health, they convened a wind “science” panel of “experts” who appear to be wind proponents and who continue to operate in secrecy.
From the Cape to the Berkshires, local groups educated their communities and organized to bring out members. Scores testified in Boston, Barnstable and Hancock. Hundreds crowded town and regional meetings. Without the vital work of local groups all over the Commonwealth, there would be costly, hazardous, and foolish industrial wind developments springing up in a community near you.
Fairhaven Board of Health hears resident concerns
With a statewide siting bill out of the picture, battles over improper siting will be pursued town by town. Fairhaven is the most recent community to have town committees actively reviewing proposals. In the South Coast Today, Beth Purdue reports on the Board of Health meeting which drew close to 100 people on December 19, 2011. In the siting bill, boards of health would have had no authority. Emerging health studies, like the Ambrose and Rand report discussed at the Fairhaven BOH meeting, convey the serious exposure residents will face if the two 400-ft turbines are built.
Another nail in the coffin of industrial wind in Massachusetts
A new study documents low frequency noise and infrasound in Falmouth.
“The Bruce McPherson infrasound and low frequency noise study” was released on December 4, 2011. This study measured low frequency sound from an industrial wind turbine in Falmouth. It was conducted by acoustic noise control engineers Stephen E. Ambrose, (a Board Certified member of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering ) and Robert W. Rand, an INCE Member. The research documents measurable low frequency sound in homes near the turbines and concludes, “The study results emphasize the need for epidemiological and laboratory research by medical health professionals and acousticians concerned with public health and well-being.”
(If you have trouble downloading the study, try this link).
Senator Downing Tables WESRA
At an energy forum in Great Barrington on December 14th, Senator Ben Downing announced that he is tabling the controversial wind siting bill. The surprise announcement came a little over a week after Senate President Therese Murray changed her position on the bill. She said she was persuaded by her constituents, who have testified to the adverse impacts of wind turbines on health as well as property values.
According to Patrick Cassidy’s Cape Cod Times article on December 6, 2011, Senator Murray told the Berkshire Chamber of Commerce, “I think wind power has to be part of the solution for our energy fixes, but I don’t believe losing local control is the way to go so I would have to support my towns who don’t support the siting bill.”
Wind Wise ~ Massachusetts applauds this change of view, and welcomes Senator Downing’s intention to send the bill to study. All three bills filed to streamline the siting of industrial scale wind turbines were filed as “emergency” legislation, which would have allowed them to go into effect as soon as they were signed by the governor.
As co-chair, with Representative John D. Keenan, of the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy, Downing has encountered a barrage of environmentalists, municipal officials, and anti-industrial-wind activists at two hearings and many other public meetings. WESRA opponents have emphasized that communities need local control over wind siting decisions because of the array of potential impacts to human health, wildlife, water supplies, and scenic vistas.
This is what he heard from people opposing WESRA and industrial wind turbines.
- The desire for local control
- Frustrations with corporate subsidies
- Lack of local benefit
- Concern about replacing existing environmental law
- Standards should be developed first
- Impact of overdevelopment of wind energy on tourism
- Impact on real estate
- More focus on conservation and efficiency
- More support for solar
He also told the crowd of 75 people at the Berkshire South Regional Community Center that he had watched the movie Windfall and had talked with Dr. Ben Luce, about why wind energy is not viable on the ridgelines of the northeast.
Thanks to the folks at Preserve Lenox Mountain for capturing this video from the Energy Forum at the Berkshire South Community Center in Great Barrington.
Duxbury Project Meets Strong Opposition
It isn’t only Shelburne and Falmouth and Fairhaven and Lenox where turbine proposals are meeting stiff 
opposition. The Boston Globe’s Christine Legere highlighted the speed of town residents in getting organized (“Duxbury Neighbors Organize Quickly” 11/20/11). The town of Duxbury’s municipal turbine plan would place almost 900 people within a 1.24 mile radius of the single turbine currently under discussion. With a marginal wind “resource” and potential impacts on residents, recreation areas and wildlife, it is no wonder residents are concerned.
Shelburne’s (and Buckland’s) Sleeping Giant is Awake
Photo Credit: Diane Broncaccio, The Recorder (Greenfield)
When was the last time a Zoning Board of Appeals hearing brought out 250 people to show their concern about anything in town government, never mind something as big (and often stealthily pursued) as an industrial wind turbine project? That’s what happened on Thursday November 17, 2011
The small towns of Shelburne and Buckland, connected by the village of Shelburne Falls, had much to ponder in the Mt. Massaemet Wind proposal. Thanks to a strong neighbor-to-neighbor effort, with at least 3 groups springing up, the turnout at the ZBA hearing sent a message to town officials and the proposal was withdrawn. This is a great victory, but it is also an early skirmish. The developer is now aware of what he is up against. And with the WESRA initiative moving slowly through the legislature, it could end the ability of towns to make their own decisions about wind projects.
Wind Wise ~ Massachusetts 