by jboullion | Dec 7, 2010 | Uncategorized
From a column by Robert J. McCunney, Robert Dobie and David M. Lipscomb in The Oregonian, Portland, Oregon:
While opponents of wind energy have attempted to use self-published reports to block projects, the science is clear. Independent studies conducted around the world consistently find that wind farms have no direct impact on physical health. In fact, with no air or water pollution emissions, wind energy is essential to reducing public health impacts from the energy sector.
A minority of residents living near wind projects may sometimes find the turbine sounds annoying and the same is true with any environmental sound. Annoyance is a subjective effect that varies among people and circumstances. Many residents in Oregon and across the United States find wind turbines to be a non-intrusive neighbor.
In 2009, we participated in an international multidisciplinary scientific advisory panel to review current literature on the perceived health effects of wind turbines. The panel found no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects. It is important to note that while this effort was funded by the American and Canadian Wind Energy Associations, we are independent scientists who had no involvement with the wind industry prior to this engagement.
The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council also conducted peer-reviewed research on the issue: Its findings: “There is currently no published scientific evidence to positively link wind turbines with adverse health effects.”
Robert J. McCunney is a research scientist in occupational and environmental medicine at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Department of Biological Engineering. Robert Dobie is a clinical professor of otolaryngology at both the University of Texas-San Antonio and the University of California, Davis. David M. Lipscomb is president of Correct Service Inc. in Stanwood, Wash.
by jboullion | Dec 7, 2010 | Uncategorized
From a column by Robert J. McCunney, Robert Dobie and David M. Lipscomb in The Oregonian, Portland, Oregon:
While opponents of wind energy have attempted to use self-published reports to block projects, the science is clear. Independent studies conducted around the world consistently find that wind farms have no direct impact on physical health. In fact, with no air or water pollution emissions, wind energy is essential to reducing public health impacts from the energy sector.
A minority of residents living near wind projects may sometimes find the turbine sounds annoying and the same is true with any environmental sound. Annoyance is a subjective effect that varies among people and circumstances. Many residents in Oregon and across the United States find wind turbines to be a non-intrusive neighbor.
In 2009, we participated in an international multidisciplinary scientific advisory panel to review current literature on the perceived health effects of wind turbines. The panel found no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects. It is important to note that while this effort was funded by the American and Canadian Wind Energy Associations, we are independent scientists who had no involvement with the wind industry prior to this engagement.
The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council also conducted peer-reviewed research on the issue: Its findings: “There is currently no published scientific evidence to positively link wind turbines with adverse health effects.”
Robert J. McCunney is a research scientist in occupational and environmental medicine at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Department of Biological Engineering. Robert Dobie is a clinical professor of otolaryngology at both the University of Texas-San Antonio and the University of California, Davis. David M. Lipscomb is president of Correct Service Inc. in Stanwood, Wash.
by jboullion | Nov 29, 2010 | Uncategorized
From an article by Tom Content in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
As a new administration prepares to take office in Madison, with a different attitude toward renewable energy than the Doyle administration, We Energies is pressing forward with plans to build a wood-burning power plant in north-central Wisconsin.
The state Public Service Commission will hold a hearing on the project this week, with a decision expected early in 2011.
Concerns about greenhouse gas emissions, the cost of the project and even competition for biomass are all being reviewed as the proposal makes its way through the state approval process.
We Energies is optimistic, as it has won all the local approvals it needs from officials for the Village of Rothschild and the Village of Weston, utility spokesman Brian Manthey said.
“We believe we’ve answered every question that has come up, and we are pleased that we’ve gotten unanimous support from the municipal boards for the project,” he said. “We’ll continue to supply the information needed to move the project forward at the state level.”
The $255 million project at the Domtar Corp. paper mill in Rothschild, south of Wausau, would generate 50 megawatts of electricity, enough to power about 40,000 typical homes. It also would provide steam for the Domtar mill. . . .
The $255 million cost of the Domtar project is also raising concerns.
An analysis by auditors at the PSC found that building a wind farm would be less expensive for customers than building this project. The commission suggested that We Energies explore the possibility of burning wood in conjunction with coal at some of its existing coal-fired power plants, such as its older coal plant in Oak Creek.
An estimate by the customer group Citizens’ Utility Board found the plant would be twice as expensive as a similar-sized wind farm, executive director Charlie Higley said.
While the cost may be higher, We Energies said the utility wants to diversify its renewable energy sources beyond wind. And unlike wind and solar projects, biomass power plants have the added benefit of being able to run round the clock.
In addition, Allan Mihm, We Energies director of generation projects, said the project is more efficient because it’s supplying electricity and steam. It would cost the utility $20 million more to build a power plant separate from the paper mill, he said.
by jboullion | Nov 19, 2010 | Uncategorized
From GE Reports, a blog that is sponsored by GE but created by a group of tech bloggers and editors. The content covers topics from aviation to alternative energy to healthcare — virtually everything in the “innovative technology” space.
by jboullion | Nov 17, 2010 | Uncategorized
From a presentation by RENEW executive director Michael Vickerman at the November 15-16, 2010, in St. Paul, MN:
•Understand that demographics matter – there is a deep cultural divide between farm households and commuter households
•Developers who operate in a transparent, above-board, even-handed manner will eventually earn the community’s trust
•Maintain an active presence in the community – figure out a way to support youth groups and local charities
•How one responds to complaints in the first year of project operation will make a lasting impression
•While it not possible to please all the people all the time, strive to stay on the good side of the most influential residents
•Eventually, wind turbines will become an accepted part of the landscape
•Good neighbor payments are helpful, but they’re no panacea
45 dBa sound thresholds are here to stay
•Sensitivities to environmental impacts vary widely – how individuals may respond to environmental changes can’t be predicted accurately
•Opposition to wind energy capture is as old as Don Quixote
•Some individuals are intrinsically put off by tall structures and continuous motion
•Public acceptance of WI’s smallest projects has been very high
