Originally Posted by djpbarry
I am ridiculing the idea that governments essentially tell scientists what to do and what not to do, that research agendas are set by governments and not research institutes.
What like this example:
ETSU-R97 was written for the DTI in 1997 and is to be used for setting limits for noise from wind turbine.
It has long been criticised for being old and outdated and for failing to protect the public and requests have been made by many bodies, that ETSU be reviewed, for example,
"Controversies over ETSU-R-97 continue to cause delay and uncertainty among applicants, decision makers and communities. Planning Inspectors have refused applications where ETSU-R-97 has been followed as they are not confident about protection."
"ETSU-R-97 itself contained a recommendation that it be reviewed within a period that has long expired."
"DECC should, as a matter of urgency, commission a full review of ETSU-R-97."
DECC approached Hayes MacKenzie, a consultancy who worked extensively representing wind developers at planning appeals and subsequently commissioned a review of the application of ETSU rather than a review of ETSU itself.
"To ensure that the ETSU-R-97 guidance is still fit for purpose, DECC commissioned acoustic experts Hayes McKenzie in 2011 to publish a report looking at consideration of noise impacts when determining planning applications in England.
The report found good practice guidance is required to ensure consistency of approach and to clarify how the guidance should be implemented in practice."
Subsequently DECC commissioned the IoA to look at ETSU's application not at ETSU itself
"The Institute of Acoustics has launched a consultation on “Good Practice Guidance to the application of ETSU-R-97 for wind turbine noise assessment”.
From the IoA's discussion document:
1.2.3 "It should be noted that any consideration of the suitability of the ETSU-R-97 target noise levels (noise limits) is excluded from the Terms of Reference on the grounds that the setting of noise limits are a matter of policy for the Government. The absence of any discussion on the appropriateness of the noise limits does not necessarily imply that all members of the IOA NWG accept that the ETSU-R-97 limits are appropriate in all circumstances."