Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Health impacts of wind farms?

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,431 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    fclauson wrote: »
    No continuously mitigate new risks - that why systems have been put onto old power stations to remove soot etc from the smoke stack.

    Risk identified, mitigation put in place. Move on

    Do you mean A risk identified,SOME mitigation put in place ...

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Options
    #63
    Oldtree
    Registered Users Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    I do not want to vote
    periodictable wrote: »
    Pylons and turbines = apples and oranges.
    The main objection to turbines is visual, but unable to block planning on that ground, we now have "unspecified risks".
    More in your line to campaign about why cancer is the coming ailment we need to worry about, and ask why there is such an incidence of it-it's pollution and most likely food additives. Turbines are killing nobody.
    Coming into an area-and I am an outsider 40 years on- one respects local norms, so long as there is no detrimental effect. I observed an English couple objecting to ANY development locally, reporting neighbors for out of season burning, telling others not to plant their land because it "despoiled" the landscape and "the wonderful view from our home " among other things. Their modus operandi was to stir the ****, get the locals at each others throats,and then back off. A neighbor found them using his land as a walking path across the "wonderful countryside", as did I, and we each read them the riot act re freedom to roam and trespass in our country.
    I personally have NO problem with anyone walking my land subject to certain conditions, but if you're an antisocial, do-gooder, expecting us all to hang out over a half-door, and keep a pig in the kitchen, I'd better not find you on my land. Respect is a two way street.
    I've strayed away from the topic-apologies for that.
    Give me a list of names of people that turbines have killed simply by spinning in the wind, and I'll entertain the possibility that there's a problem.
    Apples and oranges are both fruits:D

    Other serious objections to turbines are the whoosh noise and flicker that residents are entitled to do without or object to if they choose. Any constant irritation that is un-escapeable adjacent to your home can have serious negative mental consequences.

    I know of many cases of where local unauthorised quarry owners (and other issues) have run ruffshod over local people. Those same local people were unhappy about it and did something about it. I hate to tell you this but a blow-in is always going to be a blow-in. If your impression of integration into a community here is live and let live (local norms) then you are sorely mistaken.

    Would you have citizens not exercise their rights, kinda like Section 261 (quarrys legislation) where anyone could make a submission but was not entitled to appeal the coulcil decision to An Bord Pleanala, subsequently changed for Section 261 A?
    Quote "Anyone can see a copy of your application and on payment of a fee of 20 euro, can make a written submission/observation on it."
    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/planning_permission/planning_permission_general.html

    and it is put very well here in another part of this board
    nuac wrote: »
    One difficulty for the council in taking action against quarries is getting local evidence.

    Many neighbours will phone or write into the council, or complain to councillors.

    If the council propose proceedings e.g. an injunction application and need evidence from locals e.g. the extent of any activity pre 1.10.64, local selective amnesia can break out. Potential witnesses lose interest. In most rural areas there is a network of relationships - family, sport, political going back generations. Often only new arrivals in the area will attend court, and their evidence on some disputed points would be hearsay.

    If the offending developer is from the same area or has strong connections there it becomes even more difficult to get the evidence.

    While Council enforcement staff may be anxious to go to court, council administrators are often anxious about possible liability for costs if case not proven. If the neighbours are not willing witnesses the council may not wish to take the risk

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057128055


  • Options
    #64
    periodictable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 931 ✭✭✭periodictable


    can create debilitating symptoms
    Quarries are different- blasting, dust, heavy traffic, broken roads.
    I'm talking about wind turbines.
    Shadow flicker is a problem. It can be dealt with.
    The wind blowing in the hedgerows by a house is louder than the whoosh of the turbine.
    Just admit it, you guys are against what you perceive as the industrialization of the countryside.
    Are you someone who believes in energy fields generated by crystals????
    Life's too short to give you guys any credence. Time to disengage from the topic.


  • Options
    #65
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    periodictable wrote: »
    ...
    The wind blowing in the hedgerows by a house is louder than the whoosh of the turbine.

    My I kindly ask you read and understand what amplitude modulation is - that is up to a 6db(a) variation in SPL as the blade passes the pylon - remember a 3db(A) variation is a doubling of SPL - often called the Whoosh-thump sound

    the link below describes this - based on evidence and physics not "voodoo science"
    http://www.ref.org.uk/publications/242-the-den-brook-amplitude-modulation-noise-condition


  • Options
    #66
    Oldtree
    Registered Users Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭Oldtree


    I do not want to vote
    periodictable wrote: »
    Quarries are different- blasting, dust, heavy traffic, broken roads.I'm talking about wind turbines.
    Are you someone who believes in energy fields generated by crystals????
    Life's too short to give you guys any credence. Time to disengage from the topic.
    You were talking about how you preferred people in your locality not to voice an opinion that you perceived was not representative of the majority of opinion in your locality. I think you missed.my point entirely about the planning system we have here.

    No, but crystals look nice.

    There is a new report on the BBC website today that says no extra risk Of All in children from pylons since the 1980's but there was in the 60's And 70's But cannot rule it out in some circumstances.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-26068363
    http://www.ccrg.ox.ac.uk/index.shtml


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    Three articles to read on this

    1 - http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/warning-over-wind-turbine-syndrome-260636.html
    2 - http://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/healthandlife/wind-power-group-slams-health-review-260836.html
    3 - http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/senior-doctor-defends-wind-turbine-syndrome-conclusions-261026.html


  • Options
    #68
    Mahatma Geansai
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,668 ✭✭✭Mahatma Geansai


    can create debilitating symptoms
    Wind Turbine Syndrome is nothing but a nocebo.


  • Options
    #69
    sotobuild
    Registered Users Posts: 17 ✭sotobuild


    Mahatma Geansai wrote: »
    Wind Turbine Syndrome is nothing but a nocebo.

    Could you post your medical qualifications so we can compare them to the DCMO


  • Options
    #70
    sotobuild
    Registered Users Posts: 17 ✭sotobuild


    fclauson wrote: »
    My I kindly ask you read and understand what amplitude modulation is - that is up to a 6db(a) variation in SPL as the blade passes the pylon - remember a 3db(A) variation is a doubling of SPL - often called the Whoosh-thump sound

    the link below describes this - based on evidence and physics not "voodoo science"
    http://www.ref.org.uk/publications/242-the-den-brook-amplitude-modulation-noise-condition

    fclauson - you might like to attend this session - it seems to cover how AM will be addressed in the new ETSU definition model

    https://ioa.org.uk/civicrm/event/info?reset=1&id=18


  • Options
    #71
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,431 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    Could there be a syndrome where someone is fearful of the effects that starting an anti wind turbine group will have on their local community , how would you come up set - back distances and anti pressure group groups to combat this fear ...
    Kind of like the guy who sued his employer because of fear of asbestos that he thought (wrongly ) might be present ....

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    fclauson wrote: »
    Three articles to read on this

    1 - http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/warning-over-wind-turbine-syndrome-260636.html
    2 - http://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/healthandlife/wind-power-group-slams-health-review-260836.html
    3 - http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/senior-doctor-defends-wind-turbine-syndrome-conclusions-261026.html
    Could you provide your own opinion on the articles?


  • Options
    #73
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    djpbarry wrote: »
    Could you provide your own opinion on the articles?

    a) Living near wind farms can have a psychological effect on people minds.
    b) Frequencies be they audible or inaudible can have psychological effects on peoples minds and a physiological effect on their bodies.

    A syndrome is a "collection of signs and symptoms that are observed in body ......A syndrome refers specifically to medical condition where the collection of symptoms are pathogenetically related."

    So to call something "Windfarm syndrome" where it represents the Psychological and Physiological effects of living within the scope of either (a) or (b) seems to me to be a valid argument and falls within the definition of a "syndrome". Its a form of classification which is consistent with the medical world..

    Discounting that either (a) or (b) does not happen would seem to me to be invalid (and this is the battle field the pro and anti wind farm lobbies seem to do most of their fighting on)

    Defining at what distance/proximity (a) occurs or at what db level (or other appropriate unit of measure) (b) occurs is open to discussion.

    Good planning (correctly conditioned and properly enforced) with proper community consultation can mitigate (a).

    Proper planning conditions with ruthless enforcement including on going (that is through the whole life of the wind farms existence as happens for airports, docks, industrial plant etc) measurement of environmental emissions (noise) can put in place considerable risk mitigation for (b)

    The issue has been exacerbated by the failure to carry out either of the two mitigation proposals I have identified. Plus made worse by the lack of research in this space (and please do not quote one survey over another as there are about equal pro and anti opinions out there sponsored either by the wind industry or be disenfranchised wind farm neighbours who have an opinion to get across)

    Most research like the NHMRC in Australia has come up with "more research needed"

    It will be an ongoing issue while we have limited research, a poor set of guidelines, poorly implemented, and poorly enforced.


  • Options
    #74
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    Take a read of this and recast your vote


  • Options
    #75
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    I recently put an AIE request into the DoH to ask what guidance they were giving in regard to wind farms. I asked this question as the DoE wind farm guidelines specifically state they do not cover any health impact.

    To comply with the 2011/92/EU directive on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment competent authorities (Local Councils and AB) have to
    "identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner"..."the direct and indirect effects of a project on the following factors"..."human beings"

    No LC would be classed as a competent authority when it comes to health and they would have to seek external guidance in this regard. Not seeking guidance would seem to be a failure in regards to the Directive.

    Attached
    1 note from the DCMO where she outlines what Windturbine Syndrome is
    2 my AIE request where the DoH state they have been asked from none nor given any guidance

    Lets discuss why no LC or AP has ever sought guidance from the DoH so that they can comply with the directive specifically as the DCMO has identified a set of risks associated with wind farms the LC should "identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner"

    As with my other thread on wind farms - I am open minded - but I think these matters should be discussed





  • Options
    #76
    AngryHippie
    Registered Users Posts: 2,625 ✭✭✭AngryHippie


    can create debilitating symptoms
    Nail-Head.

    Well played sir, you know have their balls in a sling of their own making.

    Unfortunately the next step would be to pursue a local council, or ABP for negligence in granting a license for a wind farm without completing due diligence checks. At the same time, there will have to be a negatively impacted party that has grounds for complaint on the basis of the same negligence. The trifecta will be for that party to be prepared to go the distance and not take whatever sum of hush and go away money gets tabled nice and quietly in the back room.

    They are exposed, but there is a long road ahead to get anywhere with it.


  • Options
    #77
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    What galls me is that no one asked the question.

    There is so much controversy about the answer (and thats a whole different set of arguments) - but at least one of the LCs should have asked the question.

    The planning law provides for if a LC considers there to be a health risk they need to ask the appropriate competent authority - the fact that not one of them asked is what's at issue here - not the answer they would have received.

    And Angry Hippie - you are right - to bring this to through any form of legal process even for the purposes just for a review is beyond a single individuals's financial ability.

    May be we need a tribunal !! :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #78
    AngryHippie
    Registered Users Posts: 2,625 ✭✭✭AngryHippie


    can create debilitating symptoms
    Maybe they don't consider the DoH competent, as they have little to no practical experience with wind turbines either.
    Perhaps that is why the only scrap of evidence either way was that shonky lit. review that got presented here before.
    Maybe they are just nailing their own colors of (in)competency to the mast.
    Either way, once again, you are 100% correct, but unfortunately 100% snookered as to what you can do about it.
    It's amazing the way that government can endlessly churn out safety, quality and environmental legislation, regulations and policy documents that just get ignored once something gets too hard or too expensive for a company that is "connected" or has a "common interest" with the same band of fcuking cronies that make the rules.:mad:

    You know the answer as well as I do, but it'll never happen. The gubberment manage to keep just enough people above the poverty line to prevent it from happening. (but thats another whole thread too):rolleyes:


  • Options
    #79
    BrenCooney
    Registered Users Posts: 106 ✭✭BrenCooney


    can create debilitating symptoms
    Maybe the sentence in Dr Bonners reply "in conclusion, wind turbines do not represent a threat to public health" has something to do with it!


  • Options
    #80
    AngryHippie
    Registered Users Posts: 2,625 ✭✭✭AngryHippie


    can create debilitating symptoms
    BrenCooney wrote: »
    Maybe the sentence in Dr Bonners reply "in conclusion, wind turbines do not represent a threat to public health" has something to do with it!

    Maybe you should finish that paragraph, starting with "However" and finishing with "These people must be treated appropriately and sensitively as these symptoms can be very debilitating"

    #pethates
    #liesofomission


  • Options
    #81
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    Much like the writings here http://the-law-is-my-oyster.com/2014/05/31/quotations-and-references/ where a quote taken out of context can change the perceived meaning can I ask everyone to read all of Dr Bonners response as they pass comment


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    sotobuild
    Registered Users Posts: 17 ✭sotobuild


    BrenCooney
    as a [MODSNIP] you would be aware that EU Directive 2011/92/EU requires (Article 3) that for every project

    "The environmental impact assessment shall identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner... Health"

    Looking through many wind farm applications as I have - including Wexford - I see no evidence of any LC asking any competent health body for advice. fclauson has clarified my finding with his findings that no request has ever been made to the DoH asking for advice.

    This demonstrates a failure by LCs to perform their basic duty of care or to fullfill their statutory duty (check the Planning act about checking with the Health Board for the health impacts of any planning project)

    When reading an Environmental Departments report for a wind farm which simply says "On examination it is recommended that the application be granted subject to standard conditions." I fail to see how this goes any way towards meeting the requirements of the Directive.

    It should also be noted that the 2006 Wind Farm Guidelines - when written - made no request or received no guidance from the DoH and hence can probably not be relied as giving best practice or guidance.


  • Options
    #83
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    fclauson wrote: »
    The planning law provides for if a LC considers there to be a health risk they need to ask the appropriate competent authority - the fact that not one of them asked is what's at issue here - not the answer they would have received.
    There is no health risk , hence no question was asked.


  • Options
    #84
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    djpbarry wrote: »
    There is no health risk , hence no question was asked.
    Obviously you have not read Dr Bonner's document - once you have done that then perhaps you would like to repost

    Also note there is a difference between "threat" and "risk"


  • Options
    #85
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    fclauson wrote: »
    Obviously you have not read Dr Bonner's document...
    Actually, I did.

    Am I missing something?


  • Options
    #86
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    You will see she identified risk groups - each of those groups should have had a mentioned in any environmental impact assessment for a planning application. For example without visiting every house around a particular wind farm planning how could you asses if there was any of those groups present within the area.

    What assessment and mitigating measures should be put in place with any new planning app which happens close to a wind farm - should not those people be made aware that here is a risk to certain groups from a wind farm and if they believe they are part of that group then they should take this into consideration.

    and importantly what happens if a new baby is born - in close proximity to a wind farm which falls into one of the risk categories - how would they be protected.

    She clearly identifies Vibroacoustic acoustic diseases which are a result of LFN and Infrasound exposure - without systematic measurement of these variables how can an LC determine if they are present or not.

    Finally - the precautionary principle - outlined in the document are a set of risk which may need "treatment" and as such the precautionary principle should be followed

    The precautionary principle or precautionary approach states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action


  • Options
    #87
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    Just to add to that in the world of IT and computer viruses and vulnerabilities we typically used the following definition

    ‘threat’ is a function of the capability and intent
    ‘risk’ is a function of the probability that harm will be caused.


  • Options
    #88
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    sotobuild wrote: »
    BrenCooney
    as a [MODSNIP] you would be aware that EU Directive 2011/92/EU requires (Article 3) that for every project
    [MOD] Please do not post details of posters' personal circumstances - it has absolutely no bearing on the validity of their opinions. [/MOD]


  • Options
    #89
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    fclauson wrote: »
    You will see she identified risk groups…
    First of all, she states that “wind turbine syndrome” has been described in the literature. It hasn’t – there is no consensus on what “wind turbine syndrome” is, let alone whether or not it is real.

    Secondly, she provides a list of alleged symptoms. All of these “symptoms” are extremely common complaints and there is no evidence that proximity to wind turbines results in an increase in such complaints.

    Thirdly, she doesn’t provide a single reference.
    fclauson wrote: »
    What assessment and mitigating measures should be put in place with any new planning app which happens close to a wind farm - should not those people be made aware that here is a risk to certain groups from a wind farm and if they believe they are part of that group then they should take this into consideration.
    If people choose to live near a wind farm, they are likely to experience far less disturbance than people who choose to live near a busy road or a rail line.

    So should people also be warned that sometimes traffic and trains can be noisy?
    fclauson wrote: »
    and importantly what happens if a new baby is born - in close proximity to a wind farm which falls into one of the risk categories - how would they be protected.
    The same way all other babies are?


  • Options
    #90
    BrenCooney
    Registered Users Posts: 106 ✭✭BrenCooney


    can create debilitating symptoms
    As risk is a function of threat, and it has been stated categorically by the HSE that the threat does not exist, therefore the risk can be deemed to be low to nonexistent.
    Yes the people suffering from " wind turbine syndrome" need to be treated sympathetically, but not for any physiological medical reasons. If something is happening outside of your control which you fail to control, it can have quite a significant impact psychologically, but this is very different from having a physiological impact!
    I am having considerable difficulty loading voyage linux on a small single board computer (alix 2a) the past few evenings and it is resulting in me having mental anguish. That doesn't mean the problem is with the computer, it is not resulting in me having the mental anguish. The problem is me not the computer.
    Same with the wind turbines.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    fclauson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭fclauson


    I do not want to vote
    Threat is a function not of risk but of capability and intent
    Risk is a probability of something actually happening

    a kettle has the capability to burn you but no intent (i.e. it does not have an evil malevolence to burn you)

    a kettle is not a risk free item - it can burn, electrocute, perhaps even drown you - and each of these risks needs to have mitigation measures put in place to mange the risk to the lowest possible level (i.e. safety devices etc)

    the threat from the kettle is probably close to zero whereas the risks has to be managed to keep it low (careful handling of the hot kettle, dry hands plugging it in, not leaving it on the edge of the counter so it can fall and burn etc)

    What Dr Bonner's letter says is that wind farms pose "no threat" - they may have capability but zero intent. They do on the other hand have a set of risks which are outlined - some may be physical some may be psychological and those need to be managed.

    When it comes to planning and the AIE directive an LC/AP is obliged to asses not the risk nor the threat but the IMPACT on health - and going back to my previous post - no LC or AP has sought advice on how to do this. An LC would not be classed as a competent authority on health.

    Also it has to be noted that this advice from the DCMO only became available late last year - prior to that NO advice was sought from the DoH on the topic so any assessment of IMPACT prior to that must have been a bit of a stab in the dark.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement