The link between health complaints and wind turbines:  - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: zenericwild
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 06, 2015, 11:09:38 am
content: Hi Dave,I have been following your excellent solar energy reports for some time.News about Australia's (well Abbots) decision to stop funding Wind Turbines seem to be based on bullshit. In spite of the fact that the esteemed Professor Simon Chapman's report(http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpubh.2014.00220/abstract)effectively debunked the accusation that wind turbines have an adverse health effect - the Australian Government seem to have lost their senses... and here in the UK as well, as we have similar idiots in charge of energy policy. Anyway - enough politics.I thought an interesting topic would be to examine whether the noise from wind turbines is greater than the noise produced by wind itself. It might be a good excuse to get out of the office for a day!

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2015, 12:06:55 pm
content: You may want to watch this piecehttp://m.imdb.com/title/tt1581829/(Not getting into the issue of who should finance what)

author: Jeroen3
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2015, 12:21:26 pm
content: Well it's damn annoying if the turbine is between your house and the sun.sun.... shadow. sun...... shadow. sun.... shadow. sun......And they're loud.... if you're standing right under them with bft 6.

author: tomlut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2015, 12:33:10 pm
content: Strangely not one person who lives on land rented to wind energy companies seems to suffer any of these complaints.This was a great,http://www.sciencealert.com/public-health-professor-goes-to-town-on-australian-senate-inquiry-into-wind-farms

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2015, 12:51:34 pm
content: Quote from: tomlut on August 06, 2015, 12:33:10 pmWatch Windfall (2010). It will change your mind about living next to a large windmill.

author: zenericwild
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 06, 2015, 04:02:16 pm
content: Thanks guys for the research leads. I did not know that there are some contentious installations. I can understand clearly why those objections exist.I live in Scotland where it is windy and sparsely populated away from the central belt. We did have a wind energy programme until Donald Trump came and lobbied against it.We are set to loose 5000 jobs in the industry.There are two remote communities who installed 3 x 3Mw wind turbines and they seem happy with them. I guess it's about appropriate installations. Maybe Elon Musk is right and solar is the only way to go?

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2015, 04:53:21 pm
content: Quote from: zenericwild on August 06, 2015, 04:02:16 pmIt was rejected due to an adverse environmental impact:"In the final decision to deny the wind farm, the board refused it on only one condition — the impact it would have on the mussels."http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/07/08/3678025/donald-trump-gets-to-keep-wind-power-away-from-his-golf-course/

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2015, 05:32:53 pm
content: The noise issue is not a big problem unless you live right next to one as far as I know. IMO the main issue is them being ugly and distracting (since they are moving). They do kill animals though, some birds but the main problem is for bats apparently whose lungs can't handle the pressure-waves causing blood vessels in the lungs to burst and they then die by suffocation. I'm not a fan of windpower but it makes sense in some locations, especially the sea-based ones that ideally also are out of sight. At sea the foundations can create artificial reefs which is good for marine life diversity as well.

author: zenericwild
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 06, 2015, 10:12:57 pm
content: QuoteThat's Doonbeg in Ireland - which is a different country.In Scotland, 49.8 percent of our electricity was produced from renewables in 2014 (mostly from wind and hydro).

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2015, 12:35:02 am
content: Quote from: zenericwild on August 06, 2015, 10:12:57 pmI stay corrected. Is this is your country?"Donald Trump has lost a legal action against a major experimental windfarm being built close to his golf resort in Aberdeenshire."http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/11/donald-trump-loses-windfarm-scottish-golf-resort

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2015, 12:44:23 am
content: Quote from: apis on August 06, 2015, 05:32:53 pmYeah, Mmmmmmmm,"The Obama administration on Friday said it will allow certain companies that site and operate wind turbines a kill allowance of bald and golden eagles for a period of up to 30 years in order to stimulate development of alternative energy sources."http://www.ryot.org/obama-administration-allow-companies-kill-bald-eagles-wind-power/491713

author: zenericwild
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 07, 2015, 07:31:16 am
content: Quote from: zapta on August 07, 2015, 12:35:02 amYes. However the United Kingdom Parliament recently withdrew the funding to Scotland (one of the four countries which make up the UK).http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/30/government-must-explain-removal-of-support-for-onshore-wind-advisers-sayAs an oil producing country, we are aware that much of the oil discovered will have to stay in the ground if we are to meet our CO2 reduction targets. The UK government wish to replace renewables with Fracking - which already has produced vociferous public objection - far more than any of the wind farm proposals. In fact, community wind farm projects have been successful in Scotland - the Isle of Lewis generates £1M/ year (2M AUD) for the local economy.http://renews.biz/90675/scots-see-community-benefits/It is absolutely clear to me that wind farms should not be built next door to where people live.

author: tomlut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2015, 09:25:20 am
content: Quote from: zapta on August 06, 2015, 12:51:34 pmThat film (I hesitate to call it a documentary) has been well and truly panned by critics as biased and full of falsehoods.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 07, 2015, 09:28:19 am
content: The Abbott government is anti-science and pro-stupidity.I tried to tell people but no one would listen, the sheeple elected him

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2015, 11:43:06 am
content: Quote from: zenericwild on August 07, 2015, 07:31:16 amWell, you had a option to be free.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2015, 11:45:04 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 07, 2015, 09:28:19 amCan you give objective examples?

author: tomlut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2015, 03:18:57 am
content: Anti Science:Not having a science minister in his first cabinet.Cutting Funding to CSIRO by $110 million.Cutting the Australian Antarctic Division budget by 25%.Science as a whole has not been this poorly funded for 30 years.Attempting to fund Bjørn Lomborg.StupidityMaking Prince Philip a knight.Carbon tax repeal.FTTH replacement with FFTN.Criminalising Doctors working in detention centres who speak out about atrocities.Ineffective Internet censorship legislation.Directing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation not to fund wind and solar projects.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2015, 05:05:44 am
content: Quote from: tomlut on August 08, 2015, 03:18:57 amTaking the first list on its face value, the complaints seems to be about reduce government financing of research. Not financing X and being against X are two different things. Obama doesn't finance my electronic hobby but I don't think he is against it.As for Bjørn Lomborg, it's about policies and priorities, not science. He is an economist.Anyway, this is probably not the place to debate Abbott's politics. I just wanted to know if the 'anti-science' accusation is based on facts.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2015, 05:54:05 am
content: This is what happens when you have a moron running a country without a science advisor:http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2015/05/even-learning-about-encryption-in-australia-will-soon-be-illegal/Yes, I know that we have ITAR in the U.S., which is largely, equally stupid. But even we didn't go so far as to hobble academia.

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2015, 06:29:59 am
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on August 08, 2015, 05:54:05 amYes, "we" did:http://cr.yp.to/export.htmlThe vigorous pursuit of an ITAR case against an academic happened throughout the (apparently) anti-science Clinton administration.

author: timofonic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2015, 08:28:58 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on August 07, 2015, 10:12:18 amSurprisingly, it's the same shit in Spain...

author: tomlut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2015, 12:47:07 pm
content: Quote from: zapta on August 08, 2015, 05:05:44 amThere is a distinct pro fossil fuel and anti renewable bias to their policies.

author: zenericwild
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 08, 2015, 01:16:20 pm
content: According to a Royal Dutch Shell "Scenarios" report in 2010, there are two possible energy futures. "Blueprints" or "Scramble".https://youtu.be/jQ2uIPeiEYQ]https://youtu.be/jQ2uIPeiEYQ]https://youtu.be/jQ2uIPeiEYQIt's possible we have already entered the Scramble, but I'd still like to try to save the world by highlighting where politicians are going wrong. Bullshit detectors using actual science is the best way of alerting the voters. IMHO.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2015, 01:26:01 pm
content: Quote from: tomlut on August 08, 2015, 12:47:07 pmThat's about government financing, right? He doesn't mind if people do renewable on their own dime I presume. Again, not financing X and being anti X are different things.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2015, 01:49:24 pm
content: Quote from: wilfred on August 08, 2015, 01:37:29 pmIt's a fact is that the abundance of cheap energy on demand has be been very good to mankind and coal is a big part of it. Again, it's ok to have political differences but accusations such as 'he is anti science' should be factual."Thou shalt not take the name of science in vain".

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2015, 02:31:06 pm
content: Quote from: helius on August 08, 2015, 06:29:59 amYes, and fortunately, it's not law any longer thanks to a strong constitution and the EFF. The Aussies seem to have no similar recourse.